Search

Begin New Search Topic Norms Publication Year within 25 Years

31. The Responsibility to Protect: A Background Briefing

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) concept sought to confront both the Rwanda tragedy and the Kosovo dilemma by stipulating that states have an obligation to protect their citizens from mass atrocity crimes; that the international community will assist them in doing so; and that, should the state be “manifestly failing” in its obligations, the international community is obliged to act. R2P seeks to ensure that the international community never again fails to act in the face of genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity. By accepting a collective responsibility to protect, the international community issued a solemn pledge that it cannot lightly ignore.
Topic:
International Law, United Nations, Conflict, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Norms
Political Geography:
Kosovo, Rwanda, and Global Focus

32. R2P Monitor, Issue 55, 15 January 2021

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 55 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, the Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria and South Sudan.
Topic:
Crisis Management, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Africa, China, South Asia, Middle East, Asia, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, South America, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

33. R2P Monitor, Issue 56, 15 March 2021

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 56 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel, China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:
International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

34. R2P Monitor, Issue 57, 1 June 2021

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 57 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Mozambique, Central African Republic, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:
International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

35. R2P Monitor, Issue 58, 1 September 2021

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 58 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:
International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

36. R2P Monitor, Issue 59, 1 December 2021

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 59 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Sudan, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria and South Sudan.
Topic:
International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

37. The rule of law in Poland or the false argument about the primacy of European law

Author:
Eric Maurice, Emilie Malivert, and Ana Pasturel
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
On 24 November, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal ruled that the European Convention on Human Rights was partially incompatible with the country's constitution. In July and October, it had issued similar rulings on the Treaty on European Union (TEU). This double decision comes as the European Commission suspended the approval of Poland's €36 billion recovery plan, including €23.9 billion in EU grants, due to concerns about the rule of law. On 19 November, the Commission also sent a letter to the Polish government as a prelude to the launch of a procedure that could lead to the suspension of EU funds under the budgetary conditionality regulation. The confrontation between the Polish government and the European institutions, primarily the Commission and the European Court of Justice, has been presented by the Polish government as a struggle of principle between the primacy of European law, which was allegedly being imposed excessively on Member States, with "the national legal order and the supreme force of the Constitution” being under threat. The Polish Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, explained that the implementation of EU law, as requested by the CJEU, would lead to "a fundamental lowering of the constitutional standards of judicial protection of Polish citizens, and unimaginable legal chaos". Beyond the grandstanding and responses in support of an effort to defend the sovereignty of peoples, it appears that the weakening of these constitutional norms in recent years in Poland is precisely what has led the Constitutional Tribunal to partly denounce the TEU (European Union) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Council of Europe), and that the quarrel over the primacy of European law is essentially a smokescreen to hide this situation.
Topic:
Human Rights, Sovereignty, Constitution, Rule of Law, Institutions, and Norms
Political Geography:
Europe and Poland

38. Participating in European sovereignty through law

Author:
Hugo Pascal
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
In the late 1980s, as the debate about the decline of American hegemony intensified[1], economist and political scientist Susan Strange emphasised the 'structural power' of the United States, understood as “the power to determine the frameworks of the global economy that has allowed it to choose and shape the structures within which other countries, their political institutions, businesses and professionals must operate”[2]. In Europe, the reputedly "extraterritorial" scope of certain US laws, illustrated by the heavy fines imposed by the American authorities on continental companies, could be considered as one of the most immediate manifestations of this power. It also appears to be a response to the new gap created by globalisation between a now deterritorialized market and regulatory States that are no longer homogeneous and superimposed[3], and this at a time when the institutions of international economic regulation often seem to be in deadlock. The growing interdependence between economies, enabled by globalisation and encouraged by free trade, has gradually eroded the markets established by borders to such an extent that the nation-State, conceived as the protector of a narrowly defined territory, could be considered a historically dated model[4], without a new body with a general scope having been able, to date, to replace it in its tasks, such as the fight against financial crime. In this new complex system, «new geopolitics of norms» has been created.[5] Europe must find its rightful place within it so that it can assert its sovereignty.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Law, Geopolitics, and Norms
Political Geography:
Europe

39. Reinforcing the Global Norm Against Chemical Weapons Use

Author:
Julia Masterson
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Arms Control Association
Abstract:
In recent years, the global norm against chemical weapons use has eroded, and it is critical that responsible states take action to reinforce it. Systematic violations of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the malign use of chemical agents have continued for nearly a decade without adequate accountability. These incidents risk growing in severity and becoming more widespread for as long as the issue remains unaddressed. Reinforcing the norm against chemical weapons use necessitates a unified global effort to utilize all CWC provisions and to strengthen the consequences that violators face under the treaty and in accordance with international law.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, International Law, Weapons, Norms, and Chemical Weapons
Political Geography:
Global Focus

40. The Siren's Song of Coast Guard Behavioral Norms in the Western Pacific

Author:
Marc Zlomek
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Since 2014, naval forces operating in the Western Pacific have agreed on the need to moderate operational assertiveness against the risk that a miscalculation on the water could lead to wider confrontation. Increased activity by coast guards in these waters dictates that the same considerations should apply to white hull vessels. In 2015, President Obama and President Xi Jinping of China committed to developing behavioral norms for coast guards. The fact that six years later no such coast guard norms have materialized even though the naval services provide a readily adaptable blueprint is curious, to put it diplomatically. In April 2014, the 21 member-navies of the Western Pacific Naval Symposium approved the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) to promote communication and operational safety when their vessels met. In November 2014, the United States Secretary of Defense and the Chinese Minister of Defense signed a bilateral Memorandum of Understanding on The Rules of Behavior for Safety of Air and Maritime Encounters (The Rules or Rules of Behavior). The Rules, which took root during the 2013 Sunnylands Summit between President Obama and President Xi, are meant to reduce the risk of an incident at sea and to promote confidence building between the United States and Chinese military. CUES and The Rules are similar in many respects and share the same fundamental purpose of reducing the risk of an incident at sea. During the 2015 Sunnylands Summit, President Obama and President Xi committed to developing similar measures for coast guards. At the time, China took the position that the China Coast Guard was not covered by the existing instruments. While no such coast guard version of The Rules exists, the China Coast Guard’s astounding growth and militarization, combined with the United States Coast Guard’s increased regional presence, serve to underscore the need. As detailed in this article, the very bureaucratic reorganization that transformed the China Coast Guard into a military service now make the existing Rules of Behavior easily applicable. The two sides do not need a new coast guard specific agreement but could voluntarily apply the existing Rules of Behavior to white-hulled vessels as they do to gray-hulled vessels. The solution of adapting the Rules of Behavior used by the People’s Liberation Army-Navy (PLA-N) and the United States Navy (USN) to the United States and China Coast Guards is so simple that its failure to materialize begs the question of whether China wants shared expectations for coast guards or if it believes that operational unpredictability better serves its strategic interests.
Topic:
Armed Forces, Navy, Norms, and Coast Guard
Political Geography:
Asia-Pacific