Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Preface -- Structure -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- About the Author -- Chapter 1: The Historical Framework: The Struggle over Narrative, Memory, and Identity -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Part One: '1948' -- Historical Outline -- The '1948' Blame-Game -- Historical Reappraisal of '1948' -- Multidimensional Causes -- Collective Memory and National Narratives -- Palestinian 'Nakba' Narrative -- Israeli-Jewish 'Return' -- Competing Victimhood -- Conclusion -- 1.3 Part Two: '1967' -- Historical Outline -- National Narratives -- Israeli Narratives: 'Greater Israel' and National Defence -- Palestinian Narratives: Denial and Dispossession -- Conclusion -- 1.4 Part Three: Second Intifada (2000-2005) -- Historical Outline -- National Narratives -- Israeli Narratives: 'No Partner' and Radicalisation -- Palestinian Narrative: Rage and Resistance -- Conclusion -- Chapter 2: Legal Dimensions of the Conflict and Legacies of Human Rights Abuse -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Part One (1948): The Palestinian Right of Return -- Relevant Palestinian Specific UN Texts (UNGA Resolutions) -- International Human Rights Instruments -- Retrospectivity -- Nationality Nexus -- Mass or Individual Rights? -- Limitations -- Derogations -- Customary International Law -- Conclusion -- 2.3 Part Two: 1967, Legal Regime in the Palestinian Territories -- Applicability of IHL to the Territories -- Applicability of Occupation Law to Israel -- International Legal Regime of Occupation -- Israeli Position on Occupation -- Israeli Settlements -- Applicability of Human Rights Law in the Territories -- Treaties -- Extra-Territorial Application: UN Bodies and Case Law -- Accountability Post-Oslo and 'Effective Control' -- Interplay with IHL -- 2.4 Part Three: Second Intifada Legacies of Abuse -- Applicability of IHL to the Second Intifada -- Armed Conflict?.

"Although nomadic peoples are scattered worldwide and have highly heterogeneous lifestyles, they face similar threats to their mobile livelihood and survival. Commonly, nomadic peoples are facing pressure from the predominant sedentary world over mobility, land rights, water resources, access to natural resources, and migration routes. Adding to these traditional problems, rapid growth in the extractive industry and the need for the exploitation of the natural resources are putting new strains on nomadic lifestyles. This book provides an innovative rights-based approach to the issue of nomadism looking at issues including discrimination, segregation, freedom of movement, land rights, cultural and political rights, and effective management of natural resources. Jeremie Gilbert analyses the extent to which human rights law is able to provide protection for nomadic peoples to perpetuate their own way of life and culture, and asks why such protection should be granted. The book questions whether the current human rights regime is able to protect nomadic peoples, and highlights the lacuna that currently exists in international human rights law in relation to nomadic peoples. It goes on to propose avenues for the development of specific rights for nomadic peoples, offering a new reading on freedom of movement in the context of nomadic peoples and their rights to land and natural resources"--

The relation of different theoretical approaches to one another is a disquieting question in International Relations (IR). Building on recent scholarship addressing the logic of questions and the analytical tools the scholarship provides for investigating the contributions of different explanations this piece argues that any and all explanations are an answer to a contrastive why-question. First, the article presents the objections to eclecticism. It then reviews the application of the logic of questions to IR and develops a 'contrast theory' clarifying this logic: Seeking an explanation means delimiting a contrast space within a specific interrogatory context. The article lastly shows how these concepts help in thinking about post-foundational science of IR, that is, a science with no universal epistemological foundation to knowledge. I argue that the pragmatic, problem-driven and complexity-sensitive research agendas are a stronger foundation than currently predominant conceptualizations. An example, drawn from Iran's attempts to acquire nuclear weapons, helps illustrate the value-added by a logic of questions approach. Adapted from the source document.