International Relations

L’ouvrage analyse les mécanismes de l’utilisation du passé dans les relations internationales. La réflexion se fonde sur l’étude de cas concrets. Elle étudie tout d’abord l’attitude des responsables français à l’égard de l’Allemagne et de l’Algérie. Le raisonnement débouche ensuite sur une description générale qui permet d’aborder avec un regard neuf des situations aussi variées que les cas yougoslave ou sud-africain. L’ouvrage repose en définitive sur une interpellation fondamentale : plutôt que d’être utilisée à des fins conflictuelles, la mémoire peut-elle contribuer à rapprocher d’anciens belligérants – et si oui comment ?

Democracies do not take up arms against each other. Although this axiom has attained the status of a mantra in the field of international relations, this statement is much more complex than it appears in part because it is highly contingent on the definitions and operationalizations of both democracy and conflict. This article revisits democratic peace theory, combining both institutional constraints and similarity-based arguments. Interactions between the democratic level of the dyad (the average democratic level of its members) and its democratic spread (difference between the democratic scores of its members) create a dyadic triangle that encompasses all possible combinations of cases, revisiting which dyads are more prone to conflict. The findings partially confirm and partially refute both the institutional constraints and the similarity-based arguments, leading to a nuanced alternative theory: the Interactive Model of Democratic Peace. Akin to democratic peace theory, our evidence shows that the higher a dyad's level of democracy is, the lower the probability of fatal militarized interstate disputes between that pair of states. However, contrary to democratic peace theory, we find that dissimilar-regime dyads can still be peaceful as long as they have a high mean of democracy. Following the theory of regime similarity, we consider the democratic spread of each dyad, but we find that being similar is not a sufficient condition for peace between the members of a dyad. From the empirical evidence, the article derives three heuristic zones of conflict, filling much of the gray area that has been left unexplained by previous models.

https://www.babilonmagazine.it/rinascita-stato-islamico-asia/
Molti governi, analisti e organi di informazione, dopo la sconfitta dello Stato Islamico (IS) in Siraq, avevano annunciato la definitiva sconfitta del califfato. L'IS, invece, stava già organizzando da tempo la propria espansione e rinascita nel continente asiatico.

Analisi-I talebani sanno che Trump vuole lasciare l'Afghanistan per fini elettorali e vogliono approfittarne, aumentando la regolarità degli attentati, anche per forzare la mano con il negoziatore Khalilzad. L'attuale insuccesso dei colloqui di pace non cambia i rischi futuri: sia un accordo che un "no deal" potrebbero, infatti, comunque favorire il gruppo islamista e avere conseguenze nefaste per il Paese.

The paper drives home the point that Ethiopia needs to initiate discussions to join the Open Government Partnership (OGP) initiative as a sign of its commitment to promote accountability, transparency and civic engagement. In particular, it stresses that there are three significant reasons why Ethiopia should join the initiative: restoring public trust, securing global reputation and access to the OGP resources and expertise.

This essay deals with all key responses to a tweet on Srebrenica “Genocide” that Rajko Vasić
published on 11 July 2018, interpreting those as a mini-model to elucidate the entire period of the
Dayton peace implementation. It demonstrates that the international community, including primarily
the US and the UK, relates to the peace implementation as a process of continuing war in BosniaHerzegovina by other means. “Hate speech” perspective and ICTY Genocide indictments/verdicts are
here explained as an auxiliary tool to achieve the very same purpose. Most importantly, it is here
argued, and supported through a number of examples, that the issue of meaning as attributed to
one’s political interlocutor, or a treaty or legislation, is preponderant in politics. Lastly, the author
presents details from the UN Security Council 8 July 2015 session to illustrate the key conclusions of
the analysis.

Ethiopia has implemented one of the world's most cost-effective systems to document land holdings, the land certification system. After more than 15 years since its launch, questions have been raised regarding its functionality. Specifically, there are concerns about the process of updating land certificates, thus ensuring the certificates and the registry are up-to-date. This exploratory evaluation seeks to provide formative evidence regarding this question, and, if warranted, give direction as to where additional research is needed. We find that in some areas, the mechanisms for updating land certificates are functional and in other areas not. Based upon these findings, we suggest four areas for future research, namely: (1) assessing the extent of non-functionality on a broader scale, (2) investigating the causes of non-functionality and viable options for addressing the cases thereof, (3) how policy can best address uninheritable land due to its small size, and (4) evaluating the viability of the future of rural livelihoods and what services ought to be put in place to enable a transition that provides decent livelihood alternatives.

Athens: On October 9th, 2019, with a “nod” from President Trump—given via Twitter—the Turkish military began an all-out aerial bombardment and invasion of Northeastern Syria, purportedly to clear the area to create a terrorist-free safety corridor and resettle over one million of the over four million Syrian refugees currently straining the Turkish system. This occurred despite the fact that the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) already were doing a good job of controlling the area and that there was no publicly available data that the SDF, despite being predominantly Kurdish led and staffed, had allowed any PKK terrorist activity attacking Turkey to occur from inside their territory. The PKK, who the Turks continue to confuse with the Kurdish People’s Protection Units YPG) and Women’s Protection Units (YPJ), have their headquarters in the Qandil mountains in Iraq, not Syria. The YPG and YPJ who make up the major part of the SDF, are the Kurds who fought valiantly to defeat ISIS territorially and to save the Yazidis being genocidally killed on Sinjar Mountain. After incorporating minorities into their ranks, the YPG transitioned into the SDF, which currently controls the northeast of Syria. While many Rojava officials leading inside the SDF sympathize with the larger Kurdish project and revere PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan for uniting the Kurds and for his visions of bottom-up governance, they state that they do not allow PKK to be active in their territory, and there is no clear evidence that they do.  The PKK is actually a Turkish domestic issue with complications in Iraq, not Syria. Although Abdullah Ocalan lived and operated in Syria until the 90s, the PKK has long ago moved to the Qandil mountains in Iraq. The PKK successfully recruits terrorist cadres from inside Turkey and attacks across the Iraqi/Turkish border are common using Turkish cadres. Two years ago, Turkey was engaged in talks with the Turkish PKK, but these talks ultimately failed and there are major issues in Turkey due to their failure to resolve their so-called “Kurdish” problem. This has nothing to do with the Syrian Kurds, however, and it is grave mistake to confuse the YPG with the PKK. Likewise, with the development of Turkish military drones, the Turks have been very successful in identifying PKK movement in the Iraqi Qandil mountains, and have, as a result, been bombing them daily, diminishing the size and power of the group. Yet domestic support for the PKK inside Turkey continues, referencing the need for domestic changes versus international military incursions.

Tratando-se de integração regional, um fenômeno não inédito, porém visto com maior importância em todo o globo com o fim da Guerra Fria e o ordenamento internacional de então, percebemos algumas descontinuidades idiossincráticas da região sul-americana que explicam bem o processo em que vivemos nos dias correntes com relação às instituições intragovernamentais. Para entendermos melhor, portanto, seria necessário o levantamento do percurso histórico mais recente da região em termos político-econômicos, que se reflete em grande parte na busca de integração dos países do subcontinente tanto como forma de desenvolver-se ou inserir-se no cenário internacional-o que percorre desde modelos de substituição de importações até "giros" ideológicos de esquerda e direita nas políticas domésticas dos países dessa localidade (URRUCHURTU, 2014). Marcados pelo término da Guerra Fria e pelo desmanche da bipolaridade dos EE.UU contra a URSS, além da ascensão desse primeiro como país hegemônico do bloco ocidental, os anos 90 proporcionaram ao sistema internacional uma globalização econômica refletida na transnacionalização e liberalização do fluxo de capital, além da formação de novos espaços geoeconômicos regidos pelo processo de regionalização, que embora não fossem fenômenos desconhecidos para a comunidade internacional, repercutiam sob novo fôlego (CARVALHO, 2013). É preconizado então o que conhecemos como consenso de Washington, que representava a "abertura, a desregularização da economia e os processos de privatização da máquina pública" (CARLAVLHO, 2013, p. 17), retratando a deliberação do neoliberalismo como pauta da potência hegemônica para a região latino-americana. Como conhecemos, esses fenômenos geraram resultados nefastos nas décadas subsequentes, especialmente no tocante à questão social e econômica dos países periféricos na América latina. Testemunhamos a assimetria entre os países elevar-se e a concentração de poder tornar-se determinante pelos países do norte, o que acarretou em uma maior vulnerabilidade da periferia global. Esse processo, como veremos mais a frente, impulsionou o surgimento de ideologias que buscaram superar as tendências

The cybersphere constitutes a global disagreement space. There, the contested, ongoing ties that link states and the internet come into being. A critique of sovereignty and political economy is offered to evaluate contemporary controversies concerning authority, independence, regulation, and access to communications as matters of relationality, materiality, and disagreement. We review China's promotion of cyber sovereignty as a complicating episode that expresses development stresses of the sphere. China wishes to establish guardrails for the practices of multipolar global digital capitalism; yet, it has ushered in an Internet keyed variety of global issues-security, privacy, material well-being, developmental justice, and planetary futures. These complex aims invite and expand the dialectical spaces animating the cybersphere.