Suchergebnisse

"This volume explores the nature of civil war in the modern world and in historical perspective. Civil wars represent the principal form of armed conflict since the end of the Second World War, and certainly in the contemporary era. The nature and impact of civil wars suggests that these conflicts reflect and are also a driving force for major societal change. In this sense, Understanding Civil War: Continuity and Change in Intrastate Conflict argues that the nature of civil war is not fundamentally changing in nature. The book includes a thorough consideration of patterns and types of intrastate conflict and debates relating to the causes, impact, and 'changing nature' of war. A key focus is on the political and social driving forces of such conflict and its societal meanings, significance and consequences. The author also explores methodological and epistemological challenges related to studying and understanding intrastate war. A range of questions and debates are addressed. What is the current knowledge regarding the causes and nature of armed intrastate conflict? Is it possible to produce general, cross-national theories on civil war which have broad explanatory relevance? Is the concept of 'civil wars' empirically meaningful in an era of globalization and transnational war? Has intrastate conflict fundamentally changed in nature? Are there historical patterns in different types of intrastate conflict? What are the most interesting methodological trends and debates in the study of armed intrastate conflict? How are narratives about the causes and nature of civil wars constructed around ideas such as ethnic conflict, separatist conflict and resource conflict? This book will be of much interest to students of civil wars, intrastate conflict, security studies and IR in general"--

Intro -- Contents -- Tables and figures -- Contributors -- Acknowledgements -- Acronyms -- 1 Introduction: Understanding human trafficking -- Part I Themes -- 2 Trafficking in humans: Structural factors -- 3 Globalization and national sovereignty: From migration to trafficking -- 4 Trafficking of women for prostitution -- 5 Migrant women and the legal politics of anti-trafficking interventions -- 6 Trafficking in women: The role of transnational organized crime -- Part II Regional experiences -- 7 The fight against trafficking in human beings from the European perspective -- 8 Human trafficking in East and South-East Asia: Searching for structural factors -- 9 Human trafficking in Latin America in the context of international migration -- 10 Human trafficking in South Asia: A focus on Nepal -- 11 Trafficking in persons in the South Caucasus - Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia: New challenges for transitional democracies -- Index.

UK governments have often claimed that humanitarian intervention – without the consent of the target state and if necessary without express UN Security Council authorization – is legally permissible in exceptional circumstances, a stance that is highly controversial. The UK's position is at odds with prevailing international legal doctrine, which is counterintuitive for a country that is generally committed to international law, the UN framework, and multilateralism. It is also in tension with normative developments related to human protection, such as the international 'Responsibility to Protect' principle, which established that coercive responses to human suffering must be authorized by the UN Security Council. This article explores the background to the UK's position on humanitarian intervention, and it argues that this reflects an element of continuity in the UK's foreign policy in historical perspective, as a legacy of global engagement and a sense of moral righteousness and duty. The article also considers whether the UK's position may be contributing to an evolution of the norms governing the use of force for human protection.

AbstractFrom a critical security studies perspective – and non-traditional security studies more broadly – is the concept of human security something which should be taken seriously? Does human security have anything significant to offer security studies? Both human security and critical security studies challenge the state-centric orthodoxy of conventional international security, based upon military defence of territory against 'external' threats. Both also challenge neorealist scholarship, and involve broadening and deepening the security agenda. Yet critical security studies have not engaged substantively with human security as a distinct approach to non-traditional security. This article explores the relationship between human security and critical security studies and considers why human security arguments – which privilege the individual as the referent of security analysis and seek to directly influence policy in this regard – have not made a significant impact in critical security studies. The article suggests a number of ways in which critical and human security studies might engage. In particular, it suggests that human security scholarship must go beyond its (mostly) uncritical conceptual underpinnings if it is to make a lasting impact upon security studies, and this might be envisioned as Critical Human Security Studies (CHSS).