Suchergebnisse

Papinske poruke mira već imaju svoju polustoljetnu tradiciju. Sve ovore o ugrozi mira među ljudima i narodima, njihovim vanjskim i duhovnim uzrocima, sve predlažu neka rješenja, svaka poziva na poštivanje temeljnih ljudskih prava, na nenasilni put rješavanja svih konflikata, na pravednije društvene odnose i sl. Za razliku od mnogih sličnih svjetskih poruka i poziva, konvencija i dogovora, njihova posebnost leži u teološko-antropološkom pristupu. Autor na primjeru 23 od 51 papinske poruke od 1996. godine istražuje transcendentnu i antropološku gramatiku mira i kulturu dijaloga koje pape u svojim porukama mira neumorno ističu, a svijet stalno zaobilazi. Papinske poruke ukazuju da je transcendentni mir temelj i polazište antropološkom miru. Mir je kao realna mogućnost Božji dar čovjeku, kojemu globalno tržište donosi više nemira, negoli mira, pa je čovjek neprestano pozvan raditi oko mira. Bog je transcendentni izvor mira, a čovjek je antropološko srce mira. Da bi se izgradilo istinsko drvo mira u svijetu, valja nužno mijenjati sliku o čovjeku i sliku o Bogu. Pape stalno upozoravaju da se mir kao opće dobro čovječanstva ne može ostvariti samo pozitivnim zakonima i kojekakvim konvencijama. Stoga zaključuju da moralni i teološki aspekti trebaju prožeti i oploditi one pravne norme i forme, da ljubav treba prožeti istinu i pravdu, a da pravda u pravednosti treba biti povezana ljubavlju. Tako oni grade most između transcendentne i antropološke razine, između mira i ljudskih prava, između ljudskih prava i pravednosti, između pravednosti i praštanja, između praštanja i pomirenja, između pomirenja i mira. Put dijaloga preko praštanja i pomirenja put je do pravoga mira koji se temelji na istini, pravednosti, ljubavi i slobodi. Dakle, kulturu rata i nasilja treba zamijeniti kulturom mira, a ostvarivati kulturom dijaloga i dijalogom kultura i religija. ; Papal messages of peace have already had a half-century tradition. Everybody speaks of threat to peace among people and nations, their external and spiritual causes; everybody proposes some solutions, calls for respecting the basic human rights, for a non-violent way of solving all the conflicts, for just human relationships, and the like. Unlike many similar world messages and calls, conventions and agreements, the specifics of papal messages lie in their theological-anthropological approach. Using the example of 23 of the 51 papal messages from the year 1996, the author investigates the transcendental and anthropological grammar of peace and culture of dialogue that popes tirelessly point out in their messages of peace, but the world constantly avoids them. Papal messages indicate that transcendental peace is the foundation and starting point for anthropological peace. Peace is, as a real possibility, God's gift to man. The global market brings a man more restlessness than peace, and that is why man is called to constantly strive for peace. God is the transcendent source of peace and man is the anthropological heart of peace. To build a genuine tree of peace in the world, it is necessary to change the image of man and the image of God. Popes constantly keep warning that peace as the common good of mankind cannot be achieved only through positive laws and all sorts of conventions. Therefore, they conclude that moral and theological aspects need to pervade and impregnate legal norms and forms, love must permeate truth and justice and justice in righteousness should be related to love. Thus, they build a bridge between the transcendent and anthropological level, between peace and human rights, between human rights and justice, between justice and forgiveness, between forgiveness and reconciliation, between reconciliation and peace. The path of dialogue, through forgiveness and reconciliation, is the path to true peace based on truth, justice, love and freedom. Thus, the culture of war and violence needs to be replaced by a culture of peace, which should be achieved through a culture of dialogue and through a dialogue between cultures and religions.

Namjera je u ovom radu prikazati i predstaviti oružanu skupinu FARC, njihovu dugogodišnju borbu, propale pregovore s vladom te posljednje pregovore koji su rezultirali sporazumom. Ovaj slučaj pruža uvid u rješavanje sukoba te primjer kako postupati s drugim sukobljenim stranama. Kolumbija se ističe kao zemlja s velikim problemima, a jedan od njih su pobunjeničke grupe. Velikim uspjehom može se smatrati potpisivanje sporazuma s najdugovječnijom oružanom skupinom. Tematski okvir rada predstavlja istraživanje korporacije RAND, odnosno njenih autora Setha Jonesa i Martina Libickog koji su predstavili pet načina na koje dolazi do prestanka djelovanja terorističkih skupina. Fokus u ovom radu je na prestanku djelovanja terorističkih skupina tako što se uključe u legalne i legitimne političke procese. Rad dovodi do zaključka kako je FARC oružana skupina koja je tijekom svojih godina postojanja prošla nekoliko tipova djelovanja te na kraju postala politička stranka. Okolnosti u kojima se zatekla skupina, ali i sama država, dovele su do toga da ponovno pokrenu pregovore. ; The purpose of this paper is to show and introduce armed group named FARC, their long-lasting fight, failed negotiations with the government and the last negotiations that resulted in a peace agreement. This case provides insight in solutions to the conflict and example how to deal with other conflicted groups. Colombia stands out as a country with big problems and one of them are rebel groups. Great success is signing of a peace agreement with the most lasting rebel group. The framework of this subject is the research of the RAND Corporation, that is, their authors, Seth Jones and Martin Libicki, who showed five ways in which terrorist groups end. The focus of this paper is an ending of terrorist groups by involving in legal and legitimate political process. The paper brings to conclusion that FARC is armed group which has had throughout their many years different types of activity and in the end it has become a political party. Circumstances in which ...

Kozmopolitizam i imperij dijele dugu zajedničku povijest koja seže još u antička vremena. Kozmopolitizam kao ideju sigurno ne bismo poznavali da nije bilo političke organizacije poput imperija, a imperijalni oblik vladavine sigurno ne bio toliko uspješan da se kozmopolitizam nije barem djelomično nalazio u opravdanju i očuvanju niza imperijalnih projekata. Interes za ideju kozmopolitizma obnovljen je u posljednjih dvadeset godina pojavom globalizacijske teorije, a također se čini da je i imperij, bilo da je odobravan ili osporavan, u skorije vrijeme postao popularan organizacijski koncept u akademskim diskusijama o našem trenutnom globalnom političkom stanju. Uspostava mira i njegovo održanje u oba ova koncepta igraju značajnu ulogu, no je li uopće moguće razlučiti kozmopolitsko od imperijalnog shvaćanja mira te kako ove sličnosti (i razlike) utječu na razvitak današnjeg globalnog vladanja? ; Cosmopolitanism and empire share a long history together, dating back to Antiquity. We would certainly not know of cosmopolitan idea if political organization such as Empire did not exist, and the imperial form of government certainly would not be so successful if cosmopolitanism was not at least partially involved in the justification and preservation of the series of imperial projects. Interest in the cosmopolitan idea was renewed in the last twenty years with the appearance of globalization theory, but it also appears that empire, whether it is accepted or disputed, also became a popular organizational concept in academic discussions about our current global political situation. In both of those concepts the establishment of peace and its maintenance plays an important role, but is it even possible to distinguish between cosmopolitan and imperial understanding of peace, and how these similarities (and differences) affect the development of today's global governance?

Razvoj ljudske civilizacije usko je povezan s korištenjem energije i njezinih mnogostrukih izvora. Od doba ranih hominida na planetu, prije sedam milijuna godina, pa do sadašnjeg homo sapiens sapiens, energija je bila osnovni čimbenik opstanka vrste. Crkva općenito, a posebice kroz svoj socijalni nauk pokazuje posebno zanimanje za pitanja cjelovitog ljudskog razvoja, pa je tako predmet njezina razmatranja i pitanje energije, kao iznimnog izazova za pravdu, sigurnost i mir u svijetu. S pitanjem globalne energetike bave se izravno pape Ivan Pavao II., Benedikt XVI. i Franjo, svjesni da ono spada u iznimno bitne znakove vremena, koje treba pretpostavljati, čitati i tumačiti u svjetlu evanđeoske mudrosti. Ipak, problematika energije, odnosno energetskog sustava, još uvijek je jedno zanemareno globalno pitanje današnjice, iako je iznimno bitan čimbenik za cjelovit razvoj i ljudsko dostojanstvo. ; The development of human civilization is closely related to the use of energy and of its multiple sources. From the time of the early hominoids on the planet, seven million years ago, to the present homo sapiens sapiens, energy has been a basic factor affecting the survival of the species. Generally speaking and particularly through her Social Doctrine, the Church demonstrates a special interest in issues concerning integral human development. Thus, the energy issue is also deemed a subject to be dealt with by the Church since it is an exceptional challenge for the purposes of justice, security and peace in the world. Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis all have concerned themselves with the question of global energy, being aware that this is an extremely important sign of the times which must be understood, read and interpreted in the light of evangelical wisdom. Nevertheless, matters concerning energy and the energy system are today still a neglected global issue, though an immensely important factor affecting integral development and human dignity.

Od Teorije pravednosti do Prava narodâ liberalizam Johna Rawlsa razvija se od individualizma do jednog specifičnog oblika tzv. »komunitarističkog liberalizma«. U Teoriji Rawls će govoriti o pojedincu i njegovoj dužnosti izbjegavanja rata (građanskom neposlušnošću) dok će u Pravu narodâ govoriti o društvu i dužnosti dobro uređenih naroda na pokretanje rata ako su ugrožena ljudska prava. Prva je perspektiva individualna i miroljubiva, dok je druga društvena i ne čini se baš pacifističkom. Prva kao da je protumačena iz perspektive običnog građanina liberalne ustavne demokracije, dok je druga više nalik tumačenju nekoga tko ima moć. U tom razvoju Rawlsova liberalizma intrigira potencijalni sukob između pojedinca i društva što je osobito uočljivo u njegovu shvaćanju odbijanja sudjelovanja ili opravdanja sudjelovanja u ratu. ; From the Theory of Justice to the Law of Peoples liberalism of John Rawls develops from individualism to one specific form of the so¬called "Communitarian liberalism". In the Theory Rawls discussed the individual and his duty to avoid war (civil disobedience), while in the Law of Peoples he discussed society and the duties of well¬organized Nations to launch war if human rights are endangered. The first perspective is individualistic and peaceful, while the other is more social and does not seem too pacifist. The first seems interpreted from the perspective of an ordinary citizen of liberal constitutional democracy, while the other is more like an interpretation from someone who holds the power. In that development of Rawls' liberalism, what is intriguing is the potential conflict between individuals and society, which is particularly evident in his understanding of refusal to participate or justification to participate in war.

Tema disertacije je analiza djelovanja putem pravnopolitičkih mehanizama međunarodne zajednice, a prvenstveno misleći Europske ekonomske zajednice (kasnije Europske unije) na sprječavanje sukoba i postizanje mira na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije u vremenu od 1990. g., tj. od trenutaka prvih znakova početaka krize, pa sve do kraja oružanih sukoba/ratova 1995. g. i potpisivanja Daytonskog mirovnog sporazuma. Upravo vrijeme prvih znakova krize i početaka prvih oružanih sukoba na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije bilo je vrijeme kada je Europska ekonomska zajednica stvarala Zajedničku vanjsku i sigurnosnu politiku. Ujedno jugoslavenska kriza odvijala se paralelno s stvaranja nove ujedinjene Europe koja se našla pred izazovom dokazivanja uloge regionalnog i globalnog igrača u kreiranju svjetske politike, te u dokazivanju mogućnosti samostalnog rješavanja eventualnih sukoba na svom teritoriju bez upliva politike Sjedinjenih Američkih Država. Jugoslavenska kriza reflektirana kasnije kroz oružane sukobe i ratove predstavlja je test institucionalnom sistemu dotadašnje i buduće ujedinjene Europe, te je ista bila indikator, smjernica institucijskom razvoju Europske ekonomske zajednice, a uslijed same činenice nemogućnosti implementacija usvojenih politika/odluka kojima bi rješila krizu i spriječila sukobe. Oružani sukobi/ratovi i sama kriza na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije s vremenom je bila u suprotnosti s duhom buduće ujedinjene Europe nakon pada Berlinskog zida, a nemogućnost uporabe rješenja za kraj krize, oružanih sukoba i postizanje mira povlačilo je za sobom i pitanje održivosti takve zajednice. Prekrajanje granica silom od strane lokalnih politika na području bivše Jugoslavije s ciljem osiguranja življenja jednog naroda u jednoj državi bili su u suprotnosti s načelom uti possidetis iuris i vladavinom prava na koje se u stvaranju suvremene Europe nakon II. Svjetskog rata ista pozivala. Upravo kroz navedeno načelo međunarodnog prava, Europska ekonomska zajednica, a i kasnije Europske unija, kao i svi ostali dionici međunarodne zajednice uključeni u sprječavanju sukoba i postizanje mira na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije svojim pravnopolitičkim mehanizmima navedeno načelo koje predstavljalo razloge/polazište svih oružanih sukoba na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije nisu znale i mogle zaštiti. Činjenica djelovanja međunarodne zajednice, prvenstveno Europske ekonomske zajednice/Europske unije u skladu s izvorima europskog i međunarodnog javnog prava, te koristeći pravnopolitičke mehanizme koji su upravo proizlazili iz navedenih izvora, a bez mogućnosti fizičke, stvarne primjene istih prema onima na koje se odnosilo, kao i neaktivnost u angažiranju od početaka sukoba od strane Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, stvarali su subjektivni dojam da ne postoji politička volja oko temeljnih pitanja ključnih za sprječavanje sukoba i postizanje mira, kao ni volja zaštite međunarodnog prava na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije. Upravo željom za globalnom dominacijom u novom svjetskom poretku, kao i činjenica dokazivanja Europi da ne može samostalno upravljati i rješavati krize na svom području, Sjedinjene Američke Države preuzele su aktivnu ulogu u rješavanju krize koristeći pravnopolitičke mehanizme u skladu s odredbama međunarodnog javnog prava, čime su spriječile daljnje sukobe/ratove i postigle mir. Političkom reaktivacijom u odnosu na prostor bivše Jugoslavije, Sjedinjene Američke Države jasno su dokazale svoju političku dominaciju u rješavanju i "upravljanju krizom" na tlu Europe, a ujedno su očuvale svoj i kredibilitet NATO-a i same Europske unije. ; The topic of this dissertation is the analysis of acting through legal and political mechanisms of an international community, namely the actions the European Economic Community (later known as the European Union) had undertaken to prevent conflicts and achieve peace on the territory of the former Yugoslavia from 1990 and the first signs of a crisis up to the end of the armed conflicts/wars in 1995 and the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. Just when the first signs of the crisis and the first armed conflicts began to appear in the former Yugoslavia, the European Economic Community created the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Also, the Yugoslav crisis took place in parallel with the creation of a new united Europe that faced the challenge of proving to be a regional and global force in the creation of the world policy, as well as proving its ability to independently resolve possible conflicts within its territory without interference from the policy of the United States. The Yugoslav crisis, later manifested in armed conflicts and wars, was a test of the institutional system of the former and future united Europe, a guideline for the institutional development of the European Economic Community, and an indicator of the inability to implement the adopted policies/decisions that would resolve the crisis and prevent conflicts. Armed conflicts/wars and the crisis in the former Yugoslavia were eventually contrary to the spirit of the future united Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the inability to find a solution to end the crisis and armed conflicts, as well as to achieve peace, raised the issue of sustainability of such a community. Redrawing the borders perforce by the local policies in the former Yugoslavia with the aim to ensure the settlement of one nation in one state was contrary to the principle of uti possidetis iuris and the rule of law relied upon by the modern Europe after World War II. The European Economic Community, and later the European Union, as well as all the other members of the international community engaged in conflict prevention and achieving peace in the former Yugoslavia, did not know how to use their legal and political mechanisms to protect the aforesaid principle which represented the reasons/starting point for all the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. The action of the international community, primarily the European Economic Community/European Union in line with the sources of European and international public law, using the legal and political mechanisms stemming from the aforesaid sources, without the possibility of their actual implementation, as well as the USA's decision not to engage in the conflict from the beginning, created a subjective impression that there is no political will to tackle issues crucial for conflict prevention, achieving peace, and protecting international law in the former Yugoslavia. It was the desire for global domination in the new world order and the desire to show Europe the independence in managing and addressing the crises in its territory that enabled the USA to take an active role in addressing the crisis by using legal and political mechanisms in line with international public law provisions, which prevented further conflicts/wars and ensured peace. Political reactivation in the former Yugoslavia enabled the USA to clearly demonstrate its political domination in "crisis management" in Europe, whilst preserving its own credibility as well as the credibility of NATO and the European Union.

The paper analyzes the link between Kant's 'Perpetual peace' and the democratic peace paradigm with which contemporary International Relations are being interpreted. In doing so, the monadic and dyadic versions of liberal theory of democratic peace are explained through the institutional-structural and cultural-normative models. The theory of democratic peace is critically analyzed, with emphasis on the causal relationship between the independent variable, the democratic regime, and the dependent variable, peace. Empirical studies of cases in which the crises among democratic states have not resulted in war are also questioned, which brings into doubt the causal logic of the theory itself. In critical thought about the democratic peace theory, special emphasis is placed on the realistic interpretation of causes that are believed to contribute to democratic peace, as well as on the existence of the so-called 'democratic war'. There exist a number of factors explaining this foreign policy behavior of democracies and their hiding behind the theses of the theory of democratic peace. An example is the position of power that democracy occupies in International Relations, with which, aside from liberal dependent variables, realistic variables must be taken into account as well, such as the concentration of power, economic interdependence and national interest. Adapted from the source document.

There have been a number of philosophical, legal, & political concepts dealing with the issue of peace. The most famous discourse on the topic of peace is undoubtedly Kant's writing on "perpetual peace," not only for the cogency of its ideas but also for the applicability of the majority of them in practice, particularly in terms of collective security. Kant's starting point was that peace is a rational & moral imperative of human nature, realized solely through human efforts. Though written 200 years ago, his ideas have found acolytes in the post-Cold War period since they are, to a large extent, considered as emancipatory. Kant finds the guarantees for the realization of peace in the moral doctrine & thus rejects the use of force in the creation of peace. Relations among states are based on cooperation, not competition, so that some elements of his project are reminiscent of the solutions applied in the system of collective security. The author looks into the viability of Kant's ideas in the post-Cold War period. Adapted from the source document.