Suchergebnisse

This paper deals with civil society mobilizations and resistance in relation to a world heritage site—the ninth-century Khmer temple Preah Vihear, which is located in the northern province of Cambodia and borders eastern Thailand. In particular, the paper explores resistance in terms of (re)categorizations from a historical and discursive–materialistic perspective. The field of resistance studies has mainly been preoccupied with entities such as texts, signs, symbols, identity, and language. In this article, however, we bring in physical and material entities in order to display the ways in which matter is of importance in the (re)construction of discourses and thereby for resistance.

International law and international politics are closely linked. Despite this, the phenomena are most often studied in isolation, not only within the sub-fields of e.g. International Law and International Politics but also within multi- or interdisciplinary fields such as Global Studies, International Studies, International Relations, Peace and Conflict Studies, Peace as well as Peace and Development Studies. This is an unfortunate state of affairs, as the understanding of today's increasingly globalized international society then becomes compartmentalized and, by extension, fractured and incomplete. The starting point in this book is that international law must be understood in its political context and that international politics must be understood in its legal context. With the ultimate aim of seeking to understand law and politics in the current international society, this book contains theoretical discussions of the entanglements between law and politics as well as analyses of a number of international political and legal issues. The book not only introduces the most productive theories of international law and politics existing today, but it also seeks to integrate some of them into a multi-disciplinary framework to study law and politics in the current international society. The book also introduces a method for practical legal problem-solving: "the method of social welfare". More detailed analyses are provided of, among other things, (the differences between) American and European foreign policy, human rights, humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect. The various issues are analyzed from historical, contemporary and forward-looking perspectives

Two bodies of rules govern International relations (IR), international public law and international private law (IPL). Each country has its own IPL appointing which legal order the national courts should apply in disputes involving more than one state. Consequently, recognition and enforcement of judgments and awards are subject to an international co-operation and ruled by different international conventions with different geographical scope. This important harmonisation, facilitating international cooperation on a daily basis, is rather ignored within the academic disciplines of IR, Peace and Conflict Studies, Euro-integration as well as other related fields. This article contributes to filling this relative neglect. More specifically, the article compares some aspects of the recognition and enforcement of judgments under the Brussels I Regulation (44/2001) with the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award (1958). The article argues that it might be a good idea to collect the legislation of the two conventions into a new, single convention, dealing with judgments and award simultaneously.Key words: international law, recognition and enforcement of judgements, international conventions, international cooperation.

Abstract This paper problematizes the notion of "intent" through the concept of "involuntary resistance". Departing from the narratives of employees in nursing homes in Sweden during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, we suggest that neoliberal norms and a local management that capitalizes on social hierarchies (sex, age, class, etc.) were the context of the strong biopolitical state management that occurred due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The friction between different forms of governing became a seedbed for an involuntary resistance with an unclear intent against the state recommendations. This sheds light upon the need to (re)frame the current dominance of specific types of knowledge that are constructed in the field of resistance. We suggest that new paths of thought are needed—within social sciences—that work towards a wider conceptualizing of resistance, which embraces practices that lie outside the common thought of dissent.