Suchergebnisse

"This title was first published in 2000. An important comparative study, which considers the domestic/international interface. The book covers climate change in Australia; New Zealand and the abolition of nuclear weapons; the Bougainville conflict and settlement in Papua New Guinea; Decolonization (New Caledonia, East Timor, West Papua); Indigenous Rights (Australia, New Zealand,and Fiji); Governance Reform and Environmental Management challenges in the Pacific Island states. The conclusion evaluates propositions advanced in the introductory chapter regarding the distinctive domestic/international issues raised and argues that, in order to comprehend foreign relations in an increasingly complex world, there is no substitute for a thorough knowledge of distinctive local, social and political dynamics shaping international orientations. The theme of the book is the way that these interactions have operated in the cases examined."--Provided by publisher.

"This insightful book debates whether conflict within states has emerged as the Achilles Heel of the international community. It covers a wide-range of issues including the roots of internal conflict, small arms supplies, intervention, human rights and international humanitarian law, refugees and post-conflict reconstruction. Internal Conflict and the International Community provides supplementary reading for third level undergraduates, post-graduates and scholars of international relations, comparative politics, development studies, international law and security and defence studies."--Provided by publisher.

Abstract
Prescriptive analyses of small arms and light weapons (salw) transfer regimes have been advanced, but comparative assessment of the selling and importing of this weaponry is undeveloped. That includes examples of major arms sellers transferring this weaponry into locations embroiled in armed conflict. After surveying existing salw restraints and their shortcomings, the extent to which due diligence risk considerations shape relevant arms selling conduct is considered. Existing explanatory frameworks discussed are found incomplete. Accordingly a model is outlined addressing impediments to the due diligence risk assessments required to meet international humanitarian and human rights legal obligations. For salw sellers, they include executive dominance of sale purchase decisions; strategic imperatives; economic and commercial incentives; and capacity to conduct independent auditing of arms sales conduct. Within conflict afflicted recipient locations, they include defective public accountability; corruption; impunity; and inability to effect peaceful dispute settlement. Utilising these determinants, dyads embracing major salw sellers transferring this weaponry into locations of persisting armed conflict are considered.

Abstract
Ensuring humanitarian law compliance and repression of its violations receives constant reiteration but to mixed effect. While international judicial, jurisprudential and investigatory modalities have advanced, requisite State level competencies exhibit marked variability. This paper devotes most attention to disadvantaged States – those that, for whatever reason, lack the judicial, institutional or administrative capacity to ensure humanitarian law compliance and repression of its violations. Here a profile of 46 States is selected for review, 20 of which are identified as impacted by previous or continuing forms of armed conflict. Data from the World Justice Project's 2020 Rule of Law Index is utilised. Chosen indicators assess individual State legislative, judicial, due process, and criminal investigatory capacities as perceived and recorded by local publics and individual experts. A comparative evaluation of this data reveals differences within profiles of disadvantaged States. They are investigated to better comprehend humanitarian law compliance challenges facing such States. They include international cooperation, utilisation of amnesties, and the conduct of armed non-state actors. The paper's central thesis is that humanitarian law compliance, and repression of its violations, remains inadequate without remediation of the capacity impediments evident in disadvantaged States.

Compared to nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons or advanced conventional weapons systems, such as missiles, small arms and light weapons (SALW) and the ammunition required to render them lethal, have received less attention from arms control analysts. Accordingly the focus of this commentary is upon two particular inadequacies identified within the existing SALW restraint repertoire. They include, first, a failure to have SALW ammunition designated as an objective deserving explicit restraint designation and, secondly, persisting and largely unresolved state differences over controlling supplies of this weaponry to armed non-state actors. Both concerns illustrate how a use of consensus procedures within relevant rule formulation has favoured the interests of major SALW suppliers. The two deficiencies identified are considered destabilising given their continued capacity to degrade restraints designed to restrict deployments of this long-lasting weaponry—particularly within locations exhibiting limited forms of state capacity. The scope for existing legal mechanisms to remedy these deficiencies is examined, as is their potential to induce enhanced compliance and implementation.