Search

You searched for: Publication Year within 10 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 10 Years Topic Treaties and Agreements Remove constraint Topic: Treaties and Agreements
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Minna Jarvenpaa
  • Publication Date: 02-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: The proposition that a political settlement is needed to end the war in Afghanistan has gained increasing attention in recent months. Channels for preliminary talks with Taliban leaders have been sought and a High Peace Council created. However, despite upbeat military assessments, the insurgency has expanded its reach across the country and continues to enjoy sanctuary in Pakistan. Afghans increasingly resent the presence of foreign troops, and the Taliban draw strength from grievances by ordinary Afghans against their government. External money to supply military bases and pay for development projects often ends up fueling conflict rather than creating stability. For their part, President Karzai and many Afghan political elites lack genuine commitment to reform, calling into question the viability of a state-building international strategy and transition by 2014. Missing is a political strategy to end the conflict that goes beyond dealing with the Taliban; it must define the kind of state that Afghans are willing to live in and that regional neighbors can endorse. Knowing that such a settlement could take years to conclude does not diminish the urgency of initiating the process. Given doubts about Karzai's ability to manage the situation effectively, the international community needs to facilitate a peace process more pro-actively than it has. To be sustainable, the process will need to be inclusive; women's rights, human rights, and media freedoms cannot become casualties of negotiations. Afghanistan's international partners should commit to a peace process and lay the groundwork to appoint a mediator. This includes gauging the interests of parties, identifying actual participants in talks, and structuring an agenda. In the meantime, international military efforts must be realigned to avoid action that contradicts the ultimate aim of a peace settlement.
  • Topic: NATO, Treaties and Agreements, War, Armed Struggle, Counterinsurgency
  • Political Geography: Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Taliban
  • Author: Lisa Schirch
  • Publication Date: 07-2011
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: A successful, legitimate and sustainable approach to peace in Afghanistan requires the inclusion of Afghan civil society and their interests. For the most part, Afghan peace negotiations exclude representatives of civil society and center on a narrow agenda featuring concerns of armed groups. Attempts at a quick fix settlement could compromise the foundations of durable peace, resulting in more costs to the international community, and more death and destruction on the ground. Half of all peace agreements fail. One of the reasons why they fail is that too few people support them. Building a national consensus requires participation by and support from civil society. Afghanistan requires a peace process that is both wide and deep, with structured mechanisms for participatory deliberation and decision-making involving diverse stakeholders from the top, middle and community levels of society. Based on examination of successful peace processes, there are four broad models of public participation in peace processes relevant for Afghanistan. These include direct participation in local peace processes, a national civil society assembly, representation at the central negotiation table and a public referendum to vote on a final agreement. The international community, the Afghan government and Afghan civil society can each take steps to ensure a comprehensive, successful and sustainable peace process.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Civil Society, Peace Studies, Treaties and Agreements, Insurgency
  • Political Geography: Afghanistan
  • Author: Hodei Sultan
  • Publication Date: 09-2011
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: The Istanbul Conference slated for November 2, 2011 aims to bring to the discussion table issues relating to the transition in Afghanistan, including Afghan security, recruitment, training and equipment of Afghan security forces, as well as the reconciliation process. The conference will also focus on regional economic cooperation.
  • Topic: Security, Economics, Peace Studies, Regional Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, Insurgency
  • Political Geography: Afghanistan
  • Author: Micah D. Lowenthal
  • Publication Date: 09-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: The history of science diplomacy for nuclear security is rich and includes, for example, establishing confidence in the verifiability of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty, paving the way to many nonproliferation efforts, and damping potentially drastic responses to actions perceived by adversaries as provocative. The ingredients for success in science diplomacy may be summarized in terms of seven factors: openness to new possibilities, vision and leadership, good science, human connections, communication, time, and self-interest. Experts from Russia and the United States have identified topics that would benefit from or demand science diplomacy: nuclear energy and nonproliferation, nuclear arms reductions, countering nuclear terrorism, cooperation on ballistic missile defense, and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Differing perspectives on goals in these areas, however, provide new opportunities to work together to promote security. A variety of policy measures and physical safeguards have been put in place to prevent nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism. Because of the technical complexities of nearly every aspect of the nuclear fuel cycle and its potential for exploitation and terrorism, science diplomacy can continue to make substantial contributions on these topics. Verification of treaties, including nuclear arms reductions and test bans, is perhaps the topic within arms control most susceptible to technical options. Joint exploration and development of technical options to enable proposals for verification of treaties is a valuable topic in which science diplomacy has an essential role to play. Cooperation on ballistic missile defense (BMD) is an area of tension between the United States and Russia today. Such cooperation has technical and political dimensions. So far, the political discussions have resurfaced underlying suspicions, suggesting that science diplomacy is the stronger option for building confidence and identifying technical options that enable BMD cooperation. Although the Cold War is over, the variety of nuclear and other threats has grown, and science diplomacy is needed now more than ever to address those threats. Science diplomacy practitioners who are daunted by the sensitivity of the topics of the day must remember the successes in science diplomacy between the United States and the Soviet Union concerning nuclear weapons. The topics are important in part because they are so sensitive, and today's generations owe it to future generations to take on the challenge of science diplomacy to address the new and vexing security challenges the world faces in the twenty-first century.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States
  • Author: J. Jackson Ewing, Irene A. Kuntjoro
  • Publication Date: 01-2011
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
  • Abstract: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) concluded its annual meeting in December 2010, reaching agreements that are relevant for the climate strategies and policies of states and regions worldwide. This policy brief explores the deliberations and outcomes of this 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) as they relate to Southeast Asian responses to climate change at the community, state and regional levels. This brief proceeds in three sections. Section I reviews the diplomatic processes of the COP16, examining how they diverge from the approaches of the recent past, and critically assesses the agreements realised at the conference. Section II addresses the specific implications that these developments have for Southeast Asian countries and the region at large, paying particular attention to the unique vulnerabilities experienced to varying degrees throughout the region. Section III offers strategic recommendations relating to the current state of international climate negotiations and the existing policies and needs of Southeast Asian stakeholders.
  • Topic: Climate Change, Regional Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements
  • Political Geography: United Nations, Mexico, Southeast Asia
  • Author: Lindsey Jones, Frederik Ayorekire, Margaret Barihaihi, Anthony Kagoro, Doreen Ruta
  • Publication Date: 10-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Oxfam Publishing
  • Abstract: Uganda faces the challenge of responding to rapidly changing climate and development pressures. At the local level, many communities do not have the tools, resources or capacity to adapt alone, and will require assistance and support from government and other development actors. Though most development interventions do not seek directly to address issues of climate change, the impacts of project support are likely to influence the ability of people and communities to respond and adapt to changing climate and development pressures. Yet, few development actors have considered how their interventions are influencing communities' adaptive capacity, and what can be done to further enhance it.
  • Topic: Agriculture, Climate Change, Development, Government, Treaties and Agreements
  • Political Geography: Africa
  • Author: Aly Verjee
  • Publication Date: 05-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Centre for International Governance Innovation
  • Abstract: Southern Sudan's vote for secession in January 2011 effectively terminates the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between northern and Southern Sudan. A principal objective of the CPA, which ended the civil war between the north and south, was to maintain the government's Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) based in the south, as two independent armies. The CPA also set out the provisions to form jointly managed and integrated armed units that would become the foundation of a new national army — the Joint Integrated Units (JIUs).
  • Topic: Security, Civil War, Treaties and Agreements, Territorial Disputes
  • Political Geography: Africa, Sudan, South Sudan
  • Author: Kevin P. Gallagher, Elen Shrestha
  • Publication Date: 05-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University
  • Abstract: There is an ongoing debate about bilateral investment treaties (BITs) – and investor-state arbitration, in particular – between those who maintain that BITs encourage investment in developing countries by providing enforceable rights and protections for investors, and There is an ongoing debate about bilateral investment treaties (BITs) – and investor - state arbitration, in particular – between those who maintain that BITs encourage investment in developing countries by providing enforceable rights and protections for investors, and those who suspect that these new rights and protections have a chilling effect on regulation for public and environmental welfare and actually hinder development. For years, both ―camps‖ have drawn heavily upon anecdotal evidence and observations to support their view, as no systematic, comprehensive study of empirical data on investment arbitrations had been undertaken. To fill this void, legal scholar Susan Franck has evaluated the criticisms of investment arbitration based on empirical studies of published or known disputes (Franck 2009; Franck 2007) . These efforts produced helpful data and initiated a productive discussion of these issues . However, the results and conclusions that can be drawn from Franck's work are more limited and warrant more nuance than Franck and others so far have taken into account. Franck's work is now widely used to support the notion that developing countries do not disproportionately ―lose‖ under the investment arbitration regime. Such a conclusion does not appear to be supported by Franck's data. This article analyzes Franck's work to show where differing conclusions emerge. We show that: 1) there is a lack of adequate sample composition and size to conduct rigorous empirical work from which an analyst could draw such bold lesson s; 2) discounting the fact that developing countries are subject to a disproportionate number of claims is not to be over looked, especially when looking at claims by the United States; and 3) relative to government budgets and in per capita terms developing countries pay significantly more in damages than developed nations do.
  • Topic: Development, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, Foreign Direct Investment
  • Author: Mark Bromley, Paul Holtom
  • Publication Date: 07-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
  • Abstract: The aims, scope and coverage of an arms trade treaty (ATT) will determine the format and types of information to be provided to an ATT reporting mechanism. It is expected that one of the obligations under the mechanism will be for states parties to provide information on their arms transfers and transfer control systems. A key consideration when designing an ATT reporting mechanism is its future interaction with existing reporting mechanisms. In this context, voluntary reporting of information on arms transfers to the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms (UNROCA) and of information on transfer control systems to the UN Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in A ll Its Aspects (POA) and the UN Exchange of National Legislation on Transfer of Arms, Military Equipment and Dual-use Goods and Technology (UN Legislation Exchange) are particularly relevant. Other UN instruments that provide potential lessons and areas of potential over- lap, include UN Security Council resolutions imposing arms embargoes and UN Security Council Resolution 1540, which obligate states to provide information on aspects of national transfer controls. At the regional level, member states of the European Union (EU), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) are requested to provide information on transfer controls and international arms transfers, while members of the Organization of American States (OAS) are required to provide information on arms acquisitions. It is inevitable that the reporting requirements under an ATT will overlap with some of these instruments, particularly the voluntary UN reporting mechanisms. If an ATT is to increase transparency, then existing obligations should serve as the baseline for reporting under the new treaty.
  • Topic: Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, United Nations, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Europe
  • Author: Mark Bromley, Paul Holtom
  • Publication Date: 07-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
  • Abstract: The drafting of an arms trade treaty (ATT) represents a unique opportunity to define common state responsibilities for exercising control over the different stages of the arms transfer process and, as a result, prevent illicit and destabilizing arms transfers. A large proportion of arms transfers transit through third countries. Therefore transit controls provide opportunities to strengthen state control at a stage when arms shipments are particularly vulnerable to diversion to illicit markets.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Treaties and Agreements