Search

Begin New Search Topic United Nations Political Geography Global Focus

251. FORCE VS. LEGITIMACY: UN PEACEKEEPING AND PROTECTING CIVILIAN LIVES

Author:
Anup Phayal
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
In recent years, protection of civilians has become a key mandate for UN peacekeeping missions. A number of studies show that deploying peacekeepers in a post-conflict country can sustain the peace and lower violence against civilians. For this reason, there is a growing consensus to increase the military capacity of peacekeepers, not only to deter potential perpetrators, but also to conduct counter-insurgency style operations against spoilers of peace (see here, here and here). Yet, the core principles of peacekeeping—such as neutrality, minimal use of force, and dialogue—are incompatible with the preference for a military-centric approach, even though interventions today warrant some degree of coercive capacity against armed violence by opportunist actors. Furthermore, participating troops in “peacekeeping” missions often have less incentive to take risk by fighting against local actors. In light of this complexity, it is difficult to assess how military peacekeepers can best achieve the goal of civilian protection.
Topic:
United Nations, Peacekeeping, Legitimacy, Civilians, and Protection
Political Geography:
Global Focus

252. 2019 Guide to Women Leaders in International Affairs

Author:
Women's Foreign Policy Group (WFPG)
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Women's Foreign Policy Group (WFPG)
Abstract:
WFPG's Guide to Women Leaders in International Affairs highlights women shaping foreign policy around the world and the role that they play as leaders, diplomats, and policymakers. The Guide provides an index of prominent women from across the international community, including heads of state and government, government ministers and diplomats, and leaders of international organizations and corporations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Government, United Nations, Women, Leadership, and NGOs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

253. Assessment of the #IBelong Campaign Mid-Point and the High-Level Segment on Statelessness

Author:
Carol Batchelor
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
7 October 2019 marked a critical moment in the #IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness.1 This decade long undertaking, launched in 2014 by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’), reached its mid-point this year. As part of the annual Executive Committee meeting, UNHCR held a High Level Segment on Statelessness to assess the status of the Campaign: achievements and successes in the first five years from 2014–19, and remaining areas to be addressed in the last half of the Campaign from 2019–24.2 In order to concretise efforts to fill any identified gaps, and thereby end statelessness by 2024, participants including states, international and regional organisations, and non-governmental organisations (‘NGOs’) were invited to make concrete, timebound and measurable pledges for action. In a watershed moment for the Campaign, it received over 350 pledges from a scope of actors to take steps that will play a role in ending statelessness by 2024.3Statelessness is a surreal problem for those afflicted by it. Without a nationality in any country, stateless persons are often relegated to the fringes of society. Many stateless people are not able to undertake daily functions necessary for survival, such as having a legitimate job or doing things that require identification and legal status such as marrying, going to school, getting medical treatment, owning property or traveling. Even leaving the house to shop for groceries can result in detention when an individual cannot show who they are, where they come from, or where they belong in legal terms. In a world composed of states, statelessness is a condition of exclusion, fear and a lack of attachment or belonging
Topic:
United Nations, Refugees, Humanitarian Crisis, and Stateless Population
Political Geography:
Global Focus

254. The SDG 16 and PVE Agendas: Different Currencies or Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Author:
Sanam Naraghi-Anderlini and Eric Rosand
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN)
Abstract:
With preventing violent extremism (PVE) and promoting inclusion, access to justice, and good governance (SDG 16) on the agenda of the opening of the 74th UNGA, this policy brief highlights key challenges impeding progress on the global PVE and SDG 16 agendas, underscoring how they are two sides of the same coin. The brief highlights practical ways policy and programming conversations around these two agendas at the global and national levels can strengthen and further empower, rather than, as is sometimes the case, impede progress on locally-led action to achieve these inter-related objectives.
Topic:
United Nations, Governance, Justice, Inclusion, and Countering Violent Extremism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

255. Managing Disasters 4.0: Need For New Thinking

Author:
Angelo Paolo L. Trias
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
The UN Global Assessment Report (GAR) is a comprehensive review and analysis of worldwide progress on disaster risk management (DRM). This year’s edition challenges us to move beyond prevailing norms in DRM to consider the complex nature of systemic risk. What does this shift mean and how will it shape DRM policy, research, and practice?
Topic:
Development, Migration, United Nations, Risk, Sustainability, and Disaster Management
Political Geography:
Global Focus

256. Global Peace Operations Review: 2019

Author:
Alexandra Novosseloff, Paige Arthur, and Marc Jacquand
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Peace Operations Review
Abstract:
After several years at a crossroads, United Nations peace operations took a definitive turn in 2019, shifting away from large, multidimensional, “conflict management” operations toward models that are smaller, more flexible, and have greater reliance on partnerships. This edition of Peace Operations Review surveys a year of reforms, the twentieth anniversary of the first protection of civilians mandate, and innovative approaches to peace operations transitions. Peace Operations Review 2019 takes stock of recent trends in peace operations. With articles from Alexandra Novosseloff, Marc Jacquand, and Paige Arthur, the review: Summarizes five key trends in peace operations, touching on the issues of UN reform, the role of the Security Council, transitions, an enhanced “spectrum” of peace operations, and resources vs. mandates Examines UNAMID’s innovative approaches to the forthcoming transition in Darfur Surveys the current state of affairs of protection of civilians mandates, with proposals for greater focus on risk management
Topic:
United Nations, Peacekeeping, Reform, UN Security Council, and Protection
Political Geography:
Sudan, Darfur, and Global Focus

257. What You Should Know about the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017

Author:
Sahana Dharmapuri, Jolynn Shoemaker, and Sarah Williamson
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Our Secure Future
Abstract:
The Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 is a major milestone for US law. It recognizes that women are on the frontlines of international security challenges as powerful agents of change to create stability and peace. The law mandates women’s meaningful participation in international peace and security.
Topic:
Security, United Nations, Women, Peace, and WPS
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

258. Development – A Private Affair? The involvement of the Italian private sector in rural development cooperation programmes

Author:
Oxfam Publishing
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Investment in small-scale agriculture is needed in order to meet the ambitious objective set by the United Nations and signed by the world leaders in 2015: to eradicate hunger, ensure food security, improve nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture by 2030 (SDG 2). However, reaching this ambitious goal with the current level of resources committed will not be possible without concerted action on global challenges such as worsening climate change, fluctuating energy prices, diversification of diets in emerging economies and a growing pressure on natural resources such as land and water for purposes other than food. In the world today, 795 million people – one in nine people – still experience limited access to healthy and nutritious food; essential for children to develop properly and for fostering good health. Most of the people affected live in developing countries – 98 percent –and in Africa, one person in four suffers from hunger.1 Paradoxically, those who suffer from hunger are mainly farmers or people who depend on agriculture as their main source of income. To end the injustice of hunger in the world, there is therefore a need for a shared effort from public and private players, geared to allocate more and better investment for the promotion of sustainable agricultural development. In this paper, Oxfam investigates the flows of official development aid (ODA) committed by Italy in the last ten years to promoting food security, sustainable agriculture and rural development in its partner countries. The analysis aims to identify the main features of Italian ODA in this sector in order to evaluate its level of transparency and accountability. It also aims to verify the coherence, in financial terms, between the real allocation of resources and the political importance that Italy has historically assigned to food security issues. In parallel, this paper examines the involvement of Italian agri-food industries in rural development programmes financed through Italian ODA. In light of the wide- ranging debate which aims to promote a greater involvement of the private sector in development, Oxfam investigated the experience gained to date by Italy in one of the priority sectors of its development cooperation policy. The paper’s analysis focuses on three case studies featuring different modalities and objectives for private sector involvement, with the aim to assessing the impacts of their contribution in terms of the reduction of poverty and food insecurity in local communities. Oxfam’s purpose is to contribute to the ongoing national debate in Italy on the eligibility criteria that would promote private sector support for co- financed cooperation initiatives in partner countries; in line with the objectives and goals of the Italian International Development Cooperation policy.
Topic:
Agriculture, Climate Change, Environment, Poverty, United Nations, Food, Hunger, and Rural
Political Geography:
Europe, Italy, and Global Focus

259. Adaptive Mediation

Author:
Cedric De Coning and Stephen Gray
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Conflict Trends
Institution:
The African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD)
Abstract:
When United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres took up his post in December 2016, he observed that “conflicts have become more complex and interlinked than ever before”.1 The increase in complexity that Guterres refers to stems in part from a proliferation in the range of national and transnational stakeholders and interests that affect peace processes. We are now concerned with, for instance, the roles that governance, corruption, organised crime, increasingly fragmented opposition movements, violent extremism, the environment, gender, youth and natural resource management play in contributing to – or hindering – conflict resolution. The proliferation of actors and threats stretches the limits of traditional state and multilateral mediation processes. The challenge of navigating complex stakeholder landscapes is compounded by dynamic, interconnected and unpredictable local to global societal processes. Digital interconnectivity allows people to mobilise in ways that was not possible just a few years ago. The more the world is globalised, the more changes one factor can have in unpredictable and unintended political, economic, migration or conflict consequences elsewhere. The consequence of increasing complexity for peacemakers is that there are more variables that can affect peace processes, less stability in the behaviour of these variables, and less predictability when it comes to how peace and conflict processes are likely to unfold. Complexity therefore renders rigid adherence to analysis, plans and structures ineffective and potentially harmful. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), for instance, Eriksen has argued that the state-building project of external actors has failed, in part, because their designs have been based on fixed, non-negotiable conceptions of what the state should eventually look like, without due regard to the complex and evolving interests and relations between domestic powers.2
Topic:
Globalization, United Nations, Conflict, and Mediation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

260. Shoring Up a Democracy Under Siege

Author:
Laleh Ispahani and Ryan Knight
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
The US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion of democratic institutions and norms under the Trump administration. While constitutional checks and balances are holding for now, we are seeing the kinds of challenges that have presaged a shift toward authoritarianism in other countries. If not countered, this kind of “constitutional regression” can develop into something that looks like a more lasting authoritarian condition, with institutions that are so hollowed out as to be ineffective, and with impact that outlives the Trump administration. Since November 2016, American civil society’s reform sector has adjusted, adapted, and innovated to meet these challenges. To facilitate their success, the philanthropic sector must likewise adapt. The Open Society Foundations (OSF) are a global philanthropy whose mission is to foster open societies in place of authoritarian ones.[i] Our founder, George Soros, was born in Hungary and lived through the Nazi occupation of 1944 to 1945, which resulted in the murder of over 500,000 Hungarian Jews. In 1947, as Communists consolidated power in Hungary, Mr. Soros left for London where, ultimately, he studied philosophy with Karl Popper, author of The Open Society and Its Discontents, at The London School of Economics and Political Science. In 1956, he emigrated to the US, where he worked in the worlds of finance and investment. He has used the fortune he amassed to support philanthropy that reflects Popper’s philosophy—that no ideology is the final arbiter of truth, and societies can only flourish when they allow for democratic governance, freedom of expression, and respect for individual rights.[ii] Mr. Soros began his philanthropy in 1979, giving scholarships to black South Africans under apartheid who might lead their country out of closed and authoritarian conditions, and into ones governed by democratic principles, respect for the rule of law, protection of the rights of minorities, and civil and political liberties. In the 1980s, he applied the same principles to help promote the open exchange of ideas in Communist Hungary, and across Eastern and Central Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. While the Foundations started as an effort to help those in countries emerging from more closed or authoritarian conditions, in 1996, OSF launched its first US-based programs; as Mr. Soros wrote in 2006, “America was an essentially open society [but] even open societies are open to improvement.” Since then, OSF and leaders of civil society have worked to protect democratic society and its institutions in the US and in over 140 countries around the world. At OSF, our guiding principle is that the world is imperfect, but that what is imperfect can be improved. With that comes a commitment to examining our own role in the world, a constant questioning as to whether our philanthropy—what we fund, and how we fund it—is responsive to the most pressing issues facing the world as it really is, and not as we perceive it to be. Still, even though we have spent the last two decades supporting U.S.-based efforts to counter what we view as threats to the American democratic project (e.g. the influence of big, secret money on politics, restrictions on the right to vote, the criminalization of poverty, racial disparities in the criminal justice system, a bipartisan tendency toward government secrecy), to date, we viewed that work as part of a project to ensure that a largely sound framework was improved so that it lived up to its promise. As we reflect on conditions a year after President Donald Trump’s election, however, we think that the US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion and hollowing out of democratic institutions and norms, and could be derailed from this course of improvement. This prompts us to consider how OSF might work differently in order to allow our civil society grantee institutions to more assiduously protect against further decline. Together, these shifts in civil society and philanthropy could erect the bulwark needed to counter both the threat of constitutional regression and the more remote risk of a total constitutional breakdown. These reforms are significantly informed by rights organizations and foundations operating in other countries that are contending with threats to democratic government.
Topic:
Civil Society, United Nations, Authoritarianism, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Global Focus