34 resultados para Autocracies, International Relations, armed conflict, war
em CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK
Resumo:
This contribution is about the protection of detained persons in international armed conflict. In particular, it compares how the relationship between IHL and IHRL is understood depending on whether one is speaking of the substantive or the procedural rules of protection for detainees. It will be suggested that, whereas the relationship between IHL and IHRL raises fewer problems when speaking of substantive rules, the situation is very different when speaking of procedural rules.
Resumo:
This review essay engages with Sandesh Sivakumaran’s book The Law of Non-International Armed Conflict, exploring its significance both in international humanitarian law and international law more generally.
Resumo:
This article discusses the international legal obligation to identify and record every casualty of armed conflict that finds its basis in the treaties and customs of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The article applies the various facets of the legal obligation to the armed conflicts in Iraq and Sri Lanka and argues that the parties in these conflicts failed in their international legal responsibility to civilians.
Resumo:
The article examines the customary international law credentials of the humanitarian law rules proposed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICR) in 2005. It relies on the BIICL/Chatham House analysis as a ‘constructive comment’ on the methodology of the ICRC study and the rules formed as a result of that methodology with respect to the dead and missing as an aid to determination of their customary law status. It shows that most of the rules studied have a customary international lawpedigree which conforms to the conclusions formed on the rules generally in the Wilmshurst and Breau study. However, the rules with respect to return of personal effects, recording location of graves and notification of relatives of access to gravesites do not seem to have even on a majoritarian/deductive approach enough volume of state practice to establish them as customary with respect to civilians.
Resumo:
This article offers a fresh examination of the distinction drawn in international humanitarian law (IHL) between international and non-international armed conflicts. In particular, it considers this issue from the under-explored perspective of the influence of international human rights law (IHRL). It is demonstrated how, over time, the effect of IHRL on this distinction in IHL has changed dramatically. Whereas traditionally IHRL encouraged the partial elimination of the distinction between types of armed conflict, more recently it has been invoked in debates in a manner that would preserve what remains of the distinction. By exploring this important issue, it is hoped that the present article will contribute to the ongoing debates regarding the future development of the law of non-international armed conflict.
Resumo:
This special issue of Cold War History offers a retrospective on the end of the Cold War, 25 years after its peaceful conclusion. This peaceful conclusion is an achievement that cannot be celebrated enough, and we must continue to build international relations in conflict and co-operation on this awareness of our common humanity and our common human fallibility.
Resumo:
A series of studies on interpretations of history and their use in political debates. Includes: Beatrice Heuser & Cyril Buffet: ‘Michel and Marianne’ Beatrice Heuser & Cyril Buffet: ‘Of Myths and Men’, Beatrice Heuser & Cyril Buffet: ‘Historical Myths and the Denial of Change’, Beatrice Heuser: ‘Dunkirk, Dien Bien Phu, and Suez, or why France doesn't trust allies and has learned to love the bomb’.
Resumo:
The chapter examines the contribution that International Relations theory has made to the reading and practice of peacebuilding.
Resumo:
Explanatory theorists increasingly insist that their theories are useful even though they cannot be deductively applied. But if so, then how do such theories contribute to our understanding of international relations? I argue that explanatory theories are typically heuristically applied: theorists’ accounts of specific empirical episodes are shaped by their theories’ thematic content, but are not inferred from putative causal generalizations or covering laws. These accounts therefore gain no weight from their purely rhetorical association with theories’ quasi-deductive arguments: they must be judged on the plausibility of their empirical claims. Moreover, the quasi-deductive form in which explanatory theories are typically presented obscures their actual explanatory role, which is to indicate what sort of explanation may be required, to provide conceptual categories, and to suggest an empirical focus. This account of how theoretical explanations are constructed subverts the nomothetic–idiographic distinction that is often used to distinguish International Relations from History.