Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 20 items for :

  • practical state sovereignty x
  • International Relations x
Clear All
Editor’s Introduction

humanitarian worker has never been so complex and dangerous. Many humanitarian narratives are fuelled by the fears of organisations: they see their working space reduced under the joint pressure of states increasingly asserting their sovereignty and of more frequent security incidents due to direct targeting, all happening in the context of widespread erosion of international norms ( Shaheen, 2016 ; Bouchet-Saulnier and Whittall, 2019 ; UN Security Council, 2019 ). In recent years, several

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Open Access (free)
Governing Precarity through Adaptive Design

). While NGOs lay claim to a ‘non-governmental’ status, direct action thrived when donor sovereignty was, paradoxically, still able to cast a shadow. Given the refugee crisis, few can today contemplate the wretched state of ‘official’ humanitarianism without some disquiet. Despite what we may wish or demand, however, it is unlikely that significant improvement will occur any time soon. But to then conclude that humanitarianism is dead would be a mistake. While autonomous international direct action lies buried in the rubble of the West’s urbicidal wars

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Evolution of the normative basis

, self-determination was, at best, a tangential issue for UN peacekeeping in the 1960s. When it was addressed at all, this was done in relation to its external dimension. Secondly, when addressed in the peacekeeping context, the principle of self-determination tended to clash with the principle of state sovereignty, and the clash of the two principles was resolved – both at the normative and practical level – in

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change
Problematising the normative connection

(ised) objectives, functions and authority – all three of which are key analytical concepts utilised in this study – without touching the wording of the Charter. 11 In the process, the impact of some crucial Charter principles, among them state sovereignty, human rights, 12 and socio-economic development, may be changing. Still more significant are the wider implications of such possible change for ‘governance’ and

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change
The analytical framework

overriding and uncontested value, especially in relation to other important principles in the Charter. On close inspection it becomes evident that most principles scattered through the Charter cluster around three other basic values and are closely associated with them: 32 state sovereignty, human rights and socio-economic development. State sovereignty and human rights seem to be especially relevant to the

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change

Republic of Cyprus … Denktas’ … claim to represent some sort of interested party in Cyprus was clearly an unsuccessful attempt, and one that was not likely to succeed. 30 The Turkish Cypriots, according to this view, were nothing but a pawn of NATO’s imperialist policies. The sovereignty of the Cypriot state rested with

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change

2504Chap9 7/4/03 12:41 pm Page 171 Paths to peace for NATO’s partnerships during the Cold War, a post-Cold War NATO provided the non-predatory bandwagoning states with a practical path for adapting their predominantly non-threatening foreign policy and military postures, while also signalling to the international community the depth of their own state identity choices, as in the post-Soviet geopolitical space. Consequently, aggressive interstate behaviour in historically war-torn Eurasia has not emerged among PfP members. Despite these historical achievements

in Limiting institutions?

capabilities on all sides helped preserve the systemic status quo. In addition, the shared elitist (dynastic or oligarchic) ideology of the regimes brought them to accept the rules of a multi-polar system – that no state should endanger the vital interests of its neighbours (Maddy-Weitzman 1993: Mufti 1996: 21–59; Seale 1965: 5–99). The Arab League attempted to both institutionalise respect for the sovereignty of individual states while acknowledging shared Arab identities and facilitating a collective response to the common threat from Zionism. Its legitimacy was, however

in The international politics of the Middle East
Open Access (free)
Redefining security in the Middle East

open ‘thinking space’ ( George and Campbell, 1990 : 269), in an otherwise unyielding paradigm that focuses, almost exclusively, on state sovereignty and its underlying configuration of authority and political identity. The challenge of critical security is to reframe some of the most basic epistemological, ontological and political orthodoxies of the field and include, according to Christine Sylvestor

in Redefining security in the Middle East

overwhelmingly in the developing world, ‘critical security studies cannot ignore the politics of security provision in differing political circumstances’ ( Dalby, 1997 : 23). All this questions the claims of the state to realist types of sovereignty, from which flow their particular conceptions of security ( Krause and Williams, 1997 : 45). The disjuncture between state and society leads to

in Redefining security in the Middle East