Suchergebnisse

Temeljno pitanje na koje ovaj rad pokušava dati odgovor jest zašto je demokratska transformacija bila uspješna u Tunisu, a u Egiptu i Alžiru nije. Istraživanju je primarno pristupljeno sa stajališta deskriptivno-empirijskih teorija aktera, iako su korištene i kulturalističke teorije kako bi se bolje razumjele političke ideje i stavovi islamističkih aktera. Strategija istraživanja je fokusirana komparativna studija triju slučajeva – Tunisa, Egipta i Alžira – odnosno intraregionalna komparativna studija, budući da je riječ o zemljama koje pripadaju podregiji Sjeverne Afrike kao podsustavu regije Bliskog istoka. Komparativna studija ima različite ishode na ovisnoj varijabli kako bi se izbjegla neprirodna selekcijska pristranost te postigao kvazieksperimentalan efekt. Hipoteza koja je ponuđena glasi da je Tunis imao mekši civilni autoritarni režim koji je dopuštao interakciju i suradnju oporbenih i režimskih elita, a što je rezultiralo političkim dogovorom te, posljedično, uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U slučaju Egipta i Alžira interakcija oporbenih i režimskih elita imala je prvenstveno oblik sukoba te je izostao politički dogovor, a time i demokratska tranzicija. Neovisne varijable koje su izolirane u teorijskoj raspravi jesu: karakter prethodnog autoritarnog režima, uloga vojske, tip opozicije i vlasti, obrasci interakcije opozicije i vlasti, obrasci tranzicije u demokraciju. Uz te varijable, analiza obuhvaća i kolonijalno razdoblje koje je bitno zato što pokazuje jesu li te zemlje imale neko prethodno demokratsko iskustvo, je li ono imalo neki utjecaj na kasniju demokratizaciju, kakve su političke elite nastale u tom razdoblju i, konzekventno, kakav su oblik autoritarnog sustava kasnije izgradile. Iz analize proizlazi zaključak da je glavna hipoteza potvrđena. Tunis je bio "mekši" autoritarni režim, što je omogućilo suradnju starih i novih elita koja je rezultirala političkim dogovorom, a time i uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U Egiptu i Alžiru je sukob starih i novih elita onemogućio uspješnu demokratizaciju. ; The main question this thesis tries to provide an answer to is why democratic transformation was successful in Tunisia, but not in Egypt and Algeria. The research approach is primarily rooted in descriptive-empirical actor theories, although culturalist theories were used as well, as to better understand the political ideas and stances of Islamist actors. The research strategy is a focused comparative three-case-study – comprising Tunisia, Egypt, and Algeria – i.e. an intra-regional comparative study since these countries belong to the subregion of North Africa, which is a subsystem of the Middle Eastern region. The comparative study has different outcomes on the dependent variable, in order to avoid unnatural selection bias and achieve a quasi-experimental effect. The proposed hypothesis claims that Tunisia had a softer civilian authoritarian regime which permitted interaction and cooperation of opposition and regime elites, which resulted in a political agreement and, subsequently, a successful democratic transition. In the cases of Egypt and Algeria, the interaction of opposition and regime elites primarily took the form of conflict, with a lack of a political agreement, and thus democratic transition. The independent variables which were isolated in the theoretical discussion were the following: the character of the previous authoritarian regime, the role of the army, opposition and government type, patterns of opposition-government interaction, patterns of transition to democracy. In addition, the analysis encompasses the colonial period as well, which is important because it demonstrates whether these countries had the previous democratic experience, whether it had some influence on later democratization, what kinds of political elites emerged in that period and, consequently, what form of an authoritarian regime they later established. The analysis provides the conclusion that the main hypothesis was confirmed. Tunisia was a "softer" authoritarian regime, which had enabled the cooperation of old and new elites, which resulted in a political agreement, and thus a successful democratic transition. In Egypt and Algeria, the conflict of old and new elites prevented successful democratization.

Rad se bavi analizom reakcija Ujedinjenih naroda na zločin terorizma u obliku inkriminacije terorizma u nizu konvencija prihvaćenih u krilu te organizacije, no još više u obliku moralnih, ali i pravnih sankcija sadržanih u političkim osudama neobvezujućih rezolucija Opće skupštine, posebice tijekom hladnog rata, kao i u obvezujućim sankcijskim rezolucijama Vijeća sigurnosti počevši od 90-ih godina prošlog stoljeća. Pritom rad upućuje na specifičan razvojni proces koji počinje sankcijama prema državama odgovornima za tzv. "državni terorizam", a u posljednjih 15-ak godina sankcije su se gotovo potpuno usmjerile prema terorističkim organizacijama kao nedržavnim akterima te su razvojem međunarodnoga kaznenog pravosuđa otvorile prostor i individualnoj međunarodnoj kaznenoj odgovornosti za taj zločin. ; This paper analyzes the United Nations' reactions to the international crime of terrorism. It focuses on counter-terrorism international conventions adopted within the UN, as well as on moral and political sanctions contained in non-binding resolutions of the General Assembly during the period of the so-called ˝Cold war˝. However, the main focus of this research is on the analysis of legally binding resolutions adopted by the Security Council starting from the 1990s. The analysis of the development of the Security Council's resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter indicates that these resolutions, initially addressed to states responsible for the so- called ˝state terrorism˝, gradually became directed exclusively towards terrorist organizations as non-state actors. In this context, the ˝ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions List˝ of the Security Council is being continuously expanded with names of individuals as well as of other non-state ˝entities and other groups˝ affected by these sanctions. Unfortunately, compared to the beginnig of 2015, when only 70 ˝entities and other groups˝ were listed, in March 2017 their number increased to over 360. These ˝entities and other groups˝, which originate from Tunisia, Mali, Albania, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, the Comoros, Pakistan, Indonesia, Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, Arabian Peninsula, Libya, Sudan, Egypt, the Caucasus region, Uzbekistan, and even Bosnia and Herzegovina, differ in various ways. Some of the above mentioned ˝entities˝ aim at overthrowing the government of their country, just like ˝classical˝ insurgents as temporary subjects of international law. Other non-state actors' activities are directed towards establishing a new state (for example, Ansar Eddine, Mouvement national de libération de l'Azawad – MNLA in Mali, Sudan People's Liberation Movement – SPLM in South Sudan). International crimes committed by these organizations are not only the object of the resolutions of the Security Council, but they are also in the focus of interest of the International Criminal Court (the ICC). Although the international crime of terrorism is not covered by the jurisdiction of the ICC under the Rome Statute, certain international crimes committed by terrorists or under the auspices of terrorist organizations share some common features with crimes against humanity, which fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. Thus, the ICC indirectly contributes to the sanctioning for the crime of terrorism. Further evolution of the international criminal justice, both through the jurisprudence of the ICC and other ad hoc international and ˝hybrid˝ courts, will most certainly contribute to the development of international criminal liability of individuals for the crime of terrorism.