Search

Begin New Search Topic Sovereignty Publication Year within 3 Years

31. Open strategic autonomy: The digital dimension

Author:
Maaike Okano-Heijmans
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
In recent years the European Union (EU) and its member states hesitantly embarked on a new and ambitious path towards what came to be called ‘digital and technological autonomy’. This paradigm shift involves a turn away from the market-based, open economy thinking that has dominated in European policy circles in recent decades. The new direction is towards a geostrategic, more closed economy thinking, with a shift from a focus on trade to technology.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Sovereignty, European Union, Leadership, Strategic Autonomy, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Global Focus

32. Beyond European extraterritoriality, for legal intelligence and compliance in the service of sovereignty: A response to the extraterritoriality of foreign laws to safeguard fundamental European values

Author:
Amélie Giuliani
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
In this period of change, companies must anticipate their local legal environment, regional and international regulations and foreign laws with extraterritorial scope on a daily basis.
Topic:
International Relations, Sovereignty, Law, European Union, and Compliance
Political Geography:
Europe

33. European energy solidarity: strengthening the EU’s crisibility

Author:
Aline Bartenstein
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
By default, when the EU is hit by a crisis, member states tend to have a national sovereignty reflex. When Italy was hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic, the first reaction was to close its borders and restrict the export of urgently needed medical equipment. National interest superseded the call for European solidarity. Although member states have repeatedly managed to unite and – in the face of the polycrisis – developed a certain crisibility, no one would have been surprised if member states had preferred to seek their own advantage when Russia started the war in Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Nearly one year later, member states are (still) united – some declaring this as never before – and a gas or electricity crisis has so far been averted. This unity, which certainly threatened to crumble in the face of Hungarian opposition, German hesitancy, and the different approaches to dealing with the war, leads us to the question of what is different this time? Certainly, the EU's identity has been profoundly challenged by the war since its peacekeeping credentials – the EU is even a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize – were perceived to be at risk. Was is this identity-threatening experience that united the member states? Or was it the recognition of Russia as a common foe that strengthened the bond between them?
Topic:
Sovereignty, European Union, Solidarity, Energy, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Italy

34. Daring to Struggle: China's Global Ambitions Under Xi Jinping

Author:
Bates Gill and Elizabeth Wishnick
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University
Abstract:
Daring to Struggle focuses on six increasingly important interests for today's China—legitimacy, sovereignty, wealth, power, leadership and ideas—and details how the determined pursuit of them at home and abroad profoundly shapes its foreign relationships, contributing to a more contested strategic environment in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Leadership, Legitimacy, Xi Jinping, Strategic Interests, Power, and Wealth
Political Geography:
China and Asia

35. Russia’s Aggression Against Ukraine: Concept, Ideology, Objectives, Means, Consequences

Author:
Plamen Pantev
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Institute for Security and International Studies (ISIS)
Abstract:
The study tries to outline interim conclusions about the concept, the ideology, the objectives and the tools used by the Russian federation in this barbaric war of attrition against Ukraine – a war of a nuclear superpower against a smaller neighbouring country. The study does not aim to analyse the strange way the war is developing – Russians carry on military attacks in both a regular and terrorist manner 7 on the whole territory of Ukraine, while the Ukrainians are deterred to counter-attack the aggressor on the latter’s own territory and to fight with longer-range arms even on their own land. The author understands how many issues from the theoretic fields of international relations, foreign, security and defense studies need to be considered to understand in a holistic way the final result of the interaction of domestic Russian, international, political, economic, governance, psychological and other problems that led to launching an aggressive and devastating war in the European continent by Moscow. The purpose of the study is not to outline the avalanche of mistakes in the policy of the collective West towards a showing for decades signs of revenge imperialist Russia. Neither it aims to point to the multitude of military mistakes by the aggressor in the last year. The aim of the study is to outline and discuss the concept, the ideology, the objectives and the means of the Russian aggression. Revealing the Nazi-like behaviour of the Russian leadership and its armed forces could serve to construct the broader picture of the developing conflict and learn how to prevent a similar invasion by Moscow. The study aims to prove that the legal and moral consequences of the war will be the conviction of the aggressor for the genocide and the war crimes. This would be the only possibility for normalising the life of the Ukrainians and the Russians as well as of the broader international relations system.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, NATO, Imperialism, Sovereignty, European Union, Conflict, Ideology, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

36. SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE PARACEL ISLANDS IN 1884-1945: AN APPROACH FROM THE RIVALRY BETWEEN FRANCE, CHINA, AND JAPAN

Author:
Quyet Luu and Nguyet Nguyen
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The Paracel Islands are situated in the South China Sea geographic center and have an important strategic location for the military and the economy. Since 1884, France has represented the Vietnamese state as a protectorate to manage the archipelago. In the context of France seeking to expand its influence into the Asia-Pacific region, disputes over sovereignty over the Paracel Islands occurred during the colonial period between France (representing Vietnam), China, and Japan. The article aims to analyze the importance of the Paracel Islands in the policies of France, China, and Japan in general. Moreover, the specific activities of France in the struggle with China and Japan to affirm and protect sovereignty over the Paracel Islands would also be analyzed. Based on primary and secondary data, along with historical research methods, research methods in international relations, and other interdisciplinary research strategies, the article concludes that the Paracel Islands play an important role in the strategies of France, China, and Japan. Hence, the Paracel issue in this period has gone beyond the framework of traditional territorial disputes, becoming "internationalization” with consequences that persist to the present day. France's policy to exploit and administer the Paracel Islands was persistent, thorough, and systematic in the military, economic, political, and diplomatic spheres.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Sovereignty, History, Territorial Disputes, and Internationalization
Political Geography:
Japan, China, France, Asia-Pacific, South China Sea, and Paracel Islands

37. The Many Facets of EEZ Fisheries Disputes and their Resolution under UNCLOS

Author:
Natalie Klein
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
The core question being posed for this symposium was whether the ‘exception swallows the rule’ in relation to disputes concerning fishing in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This question emerges because of the starting point that disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)1 may be subject to compulsory procedures entailing binding decisions – arbitration or adjudication – at the request of a party to the Convention. However, while this ‘rule’ is the start, it is immediately important to point our that there are exceptions and limitations to this proposition; the grant of compulsory jurisdiction in UNCLOS is limited in significant ways.2 The ‘exception’ of concern to this symposium is set out in Article 297(3) of UNCLOS, which excludes fisheries disputes from adjudication or arbitration in the following situation: “the coastal State shall not be obliged to accept the submission to such settlement of any dispute relating to its sovereign rights with respect to the living resources in the exclusive economic zone or their exercise, including its discretionary powers for determining the allowable catch, its harvesting capacity, the allocation of surpluses to other States and the terms and conditions established in its conservation and management laws and regulations.“3 Pursuant to Article 298(1)(b), States also have the option to exclude ‘disputes concerning law enforcement activities in regard to the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction excluded from the jurisdiction of a court or tribunal’ under Article 297(3).4 The symposium papers that follow seek to improve our understanding of these exceptions to compulsory jurisdiction; do they swallow the ‘rule’ of compulsory jurisdiction? This introduction aims to explain the relevance of the exception (Part B), situate the papers that are part of the symposium (Part C) and indicate what has been jurisprudentially achieved despite the exception (Part D).
Topic:
International Law, Sovereignty, Fishing, and Disputes
Political Geography:
Global Focus

38. The Fate of the State in a Changing World

Author:
V. Yegorov
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
The main phenomenon of the social mainstream is the institution of the state and its evolution (“shrinking”), associated with the increased activity of civil society and a reevaluation of the role of the market. Postmodernists have no faith in the future of the state. They presuppose that institutions of social organization will be replaced by a network organization of individuals tied together culturally, informationally, and spiritually, with a higher level of identities.1 Their camp includes liberal thinkers who believe in the inevitable “supplanting [of] the primacy of the nation-state by transnational corporations and organizations, and eroding [of] local cultures and traditions through a global culture.”2 The social nature of humans is deeply rooted in the past, when collective forms of human existence were a sine qua none of survival, while the state was a “product” of social organization. In the pre-state era, it was supported by the “cage of norms” (customs, traditions, etc.).3 According to Thomas Hobbes, a main factor of the emergence of states was the “war of every man against every man,” as well as the implementation of the institution of private property. The legal space and the state ensure its inviolability. The liberal order invariably produced a dichotomy between the interests of society and the institutions represented by the state on the one hand, and the rights and freedoms of the individual on the other. The logic of this social order in its extreme form is Libertarianism, with its slogan of “less government.” The dichotomy of the interests of the state and of the individual crops up in a dialectical contradiction resolved with the help of effective mechanisms of mutual obligations of individuals and society as a whole (the “ethical state,” according to Paul Collier).
Topic:
Sovereignty, Networks, State, and Capital
Political Geography:
Global Focus

39. Chinese and Russian Efforts to Undermine the Global Internet

Author:
Justin Sherman
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Beijing and Moscow’s prevailing term was (and is) cyber “sovereignty.” Underpinning this perspective in China is an emphasis on the importance of “sovereignty” broadly and the importance of multilateralism, where governments are the driver of decision-making, over multistakeholderism (the current global internet governance approach), where academics, members of civil society, companies, and others have a voice alongside governments. The Russian government’s perspective draws on the Russian concept of “information security,” its belief in the importance of “sovereignty” to security, and its officials’ paranoia about “color revolutions” in other countries like Ukraine; Putin believes these events are the result of foreign interference and could occur in Russia. Although there are many general similarities between the two, Chinese and Russian officials do not view the global internet in exactly the same way.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Internet, Multilateralism, and Information Security
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and Asia

40. Sovereignty, Cyberspace, and the Emergence of Internet Bubbles

Author:
Eldar Haber and Lev Topor
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Advanced Military Studies
Institution:
Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
Abstract:
The cyber domain emerged as a perfect platform for international struggle over power and influence. International powers are actively engaged in cyber proxy warfare due to the relatively low risk of escalation, various enforcement challenges, and the vagueness of international law within this realm. These indirect conflicts might lead some global powers to close or restrict their virtual borders to avoid or reduce the plausibility of cyber proxy warfare or unwanted foreign influence in general. The formation of such restricted networks, articulated in this article as “internet bubbles,” is already shaping within the realm of actors like Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. The authors argue that liberal democracies like the United States might be at a severe disadvantage to fight against cyber proxy warfare due to legal and constitutional barriers. But at the same time, the emergence of platform governance and self-regulation might be proven as a new force within these proxy wars and reshape its boundaries.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Cybersecurity, Internet, Proxy War, and Cyberspace
Political Geography:
Russia, China, North America, and United States of America