« Previous |
1 - 20 of 814
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine with Professor Noura Erakat
- Author:
- Noura Erakat
- Publication Date:
- 02-2024
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
- Abstract:
- Justice for Some offers a new approach to understanding the Palestinian struggle for freedom, told through the power and control of international law. Focusing on key junctures across a century-long arc —from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to present-day wars in Gaza- the book shows how the strategic deployment of law has shaped current conditions. Over the past century, the law has done more to advance Israel's interests than the Palestinians'. But this outcome was never inevitable. Law is politics, and its meaning and application depend on the political intervention of states and people alike. Within the law, change is possible. International law can serve the cause of freedom when it is mobilized in support of a political movement. Presenting the promise and risk of international law, Justice for Some calls for renewed action and attention to the Question of Palestine.
- Topic:
- International Law, Politics, History, Political Movements, Palestinians, and Book Talk
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
3. Karabakh and Azerbaijani Statecraf
- Author:
- Michael M. Gunter
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- This brief article seeks to make two important and related points. The first is that the international law principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity hold that Karabakh belongs to Azerbaijan, despite misleading arguments to the contrary about supposed Armenian rights of self-determination. The second provides a partial assessment of Heydar Aliyev’s legacy and how it relates to some of the policies pursued by his successor, Ilham Aliyev. Each will be examined in turn.
- Topic:
- International Law, Sovereignty, Territorial Disputes, and Self-Determination
- Political Geography:
- Armenia, Azerbaijan, South Caucasus, and Nagorno-Karabakh
4. The Advisory Function of the International Court of Justice: Are States Resorting to Advisory Proceedings as a “Soft” Litigation Strategy?
- Author:
- Myrto Stavridi
- Publication Date:
- 04-2024
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Public and International Affairs (JPIA)
- Institution:
- School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), Princeton University
- Abstract:
- In the last decades, there has been an increase in advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that relate to vital political interests directly affecting the sovereignty of states. Even though advisory opinions are not binding and do not require the consent of the states involved, advisory proceedings have been increasingly and strategically used by states and international actors as contentious proceedings in disguise. Exploring the history of the advisory function of the ICJ and its predecessor, this article argues that advisory proceedings constitute a “soft” litigation strategy and a particularly useful tool for small states or non-state entities, as it has the potential to counterbalance the inherent power disparities in the process of international bargaining by adding the authoritative voice of the ICJ to the debate. This paper connects this development to a modern tendency of states to judicialize international affairs.
- Topic:
- International Law, Sovereignty, International Affairs, International Court of Justice (ICJ), and Advisory Opinions
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
5. Is There Hope for Gaza Under International Law?
- Author:
- Abigail Flynn
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- Why has international law failed to hold Israel responsible for its destruction of Gaza? It was built to enable the colonizer, not to protect the colonized, explains legal expert Jason Beckett.
- Topic:
- Genocide, International Law, United Nations, International Court of Justice (ICJ), Israeli–Palestinian Conflict, and 2023 Gaza War
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza
6. Genocide on the Docket at the Hague
- Author:
- Omar Auf
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- International law is a tool for both oppression and emancipation, says AUC law professor Thomas Skouteris in this Q&A as he breaks down the intricacies of the ICJ’s January 26 order for provisional measures in South Africa v. Israel, and elucidates the present and future of international law.
- Topic:
- Genocide, International Law, International Court of Justice (ICJ), and 2023 Gaza War
- Political Geography:
- Israel, South Africa, Palestine, Gaza, and The Hague
7. Resistance and Change in Form and Content of International Law: A Third World Perspective on Commodity Form Theory of International Law
- Author:
- Muhammad Azeem
- Publication Date:
- 06-2024
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Uluslararasi Iliskiler
- Institution:
- International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
- Abstract:
- Can Marxists, especially in the Third World, use international law for progressive social change? Responding to the Soviet Union's context and its jurisprudential challenges in constructing socialism, Pashukanis's seminal work on commodity form theory is nihilistic, assuming the very nature of form of international law as bourgeois with limited possibilities of radical change as its new content. European Marxism, on the other hand, in its context of revolutionary defeat and consequent postmodernist pessimism of cultural Marxism, either relies on Pashukanis's nihilistic position or a pragmatist and realist posture, insisting on staying within the law's bourgeois form and being content with social democracy. As opposed to this, Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) scholars, while exploring the imperialist nature of international law and representing one variant of Third World Marxism, have been more optimistic, wanting to use international law to restrain and shield against powerful Western states, i.e., they believe that the content of Third World resistance can change the form of international law. This article deconstructs this class “content” of international law in the understanding of TWAIL and shows the postcolonial Third World states, and even in the yet to be independent states, were dominated by their dependent local elite, which had compromised by the ex-colonizers and had started blocking radical structural changes in Third World. Soon, the target of imperialism and the Third World elite became radical movements in the Third World, and this struggle of the marginalized shaped international law. Therefore, relying on the radical tradition of Third World Marxism and taking the right of self-determination as an example, this article argues that both the content and form of international law were simultaneously used, subverted, and changed in a dialectical and dynamic way by the resistance of the people of the Third World.
- Topic:
- International Relations, International Law, Socialism/Marxism, Resistance, Self-Determination, Third World Marxism, Western Marxism, and Soviet Official Marxism
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
8. China’s Responsibility, and Ours: The Persecution and Neglect of Stateless North Korean Children
- Author:
- Rob York, Hannah Cole, and Kaylin Kim
- Publication Date:
- 06-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Pacific Forum
- Abstract:
- What happens to the children of North Korean women who are born in China? What happens when they remain in China, or when they escape to other countries? It is believed that as many as 300,000 North Koreans have fled the country—most of them since the famine of the 1990s, and most of them women. To address China’s “bare branches”—its much larger population of young men than young women—North Korean women are often sold to young Chinese men as brides. The children of these brides will be born stateless, lack legal rights, and face the ever-present danger of their mothers’ deportation back to North Korea because they are considered illegal immigrants in China. These unique challenges persist, despite China being a party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, among other international treaties. Even those children that eventually escape to third-party countries are haunted by their status, as their statelessness caused legal hindrances to their ability to settle and, specifically in South Korea, deprives them of government assistance. This study documents the treatment of “stateless” children born to North Korean and Chinese parents. It delineates the factors that contribute to their mistreatment—China’s unwillingness to anger the North Korean government, South Korea’s growing disinterest in North Korean defectors, and a lack of formal networks for North Korean defectors elsewhere. It further finds that, with China openly hostile toward “meddling” in its internal affairs, the most likely source of relief for these children will be a change in attitudes among South Koreans, the United States, and their allies and partners, resulting in conscious effort by their governments and civil societies to help them, both financially and in assisting with their assimilation.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Children, and Statelessness
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and North Korea
9. The Children of War
- Author:
- Lila Roldán Vázquez
- Publication Date:
- 03-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Argentine Council for International Relations (CARI)
- Abstract:
- Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shaken the world order and has seriously disrupted international peace and security. The geopolitical impact, the causes of the war and the reasons invoked to justify the armed aggression have been widely discussed. Among the many facets of the war, there is one issue that requires special attention, since it constitutes, without a doubt, one of its most serious consequences: the death of hundreds of children and the abduction of thousands of them, in flagrant violation of humanitarian law. We aim to analyze the circumstances and consequences of these actions, which may constitute a war crime, and to evaluate their impact in the medium and the long term.
- Topic:
- Security, International Law, Children, Civilians, International Order, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
10. Ukraine, Gaza, and the International Order
- Author:
- Faisal Devji
- Publication Date:
- 02-2024
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The ongoing crises in Ukraine and Gaza show the urgent need for a new internationalism that comes to grips with the increasing independence of middle and smaller powers around the world. Such a vision must reject the effort to re-impose a failed framework of unilateral U.S. primacy, or an effort to shoehorn multiplying regionally specific conflicts into an obsolete model of “great power competition” that recalls the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. In both Ukraine and the Middle East, the United States has been unable to impose its will either militarily or diplomatically. Smaller nations have successfully defied American–backed military force. Even more concerning, a significant share of the global community has failed to follow the U.S. diplomatic lead and support the U.S. interpretation of international norms. But opposition to the United States has not been supported by a superpower peer competitor to the United States, along the lines of a Cold War model. The current emerging world order is instead characterized by “regionalization,” a situation where middle and even small powers around the world feel free to circumvent or even defy U.S. interpretations of global norms based on more local interests and regional security concerns. The stage was set for the current situation by the U.S. attempt to assert unilateral power during the War on Terror in ways that appeared to give the United States alone a de facto exemption from global norms and institutions. These actions reduced the legitimacy of the post–World War Two international order that the United States had helped to create, and led many in the international community to seek alternatives to a system that seemed to grant the United States almost arbitrary power to define the rules. The U.S. foreign policy establishment must come to grips with the newly deglobalized and regionalized world order. A failure to do so poses a grave threat to U.S. power and influence, as relationships with key emerging powers such as India, or even traditional U.S. allies in Europe and Asia are not immune from the kind of de–globalizing and regionalizing forces seen in Ukraine and the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Cold War, International Law, National Security, Hegemony, Grand Strategy, Armed Conflict, International Order, Russia-Ukraine War, and 2023 Gaza War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, Israel, Eastern Europe, Palestine, Gaza, and United States of America
11. R2P Monitor, Issue 67, 1 December 2023
- Author:
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Abstract:
- R2P Monitor is a quarterly publication applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 67 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Haiti, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nicaragua, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Central African Republic, South Sudan and Yemen.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Nicaragua, Haiti, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso
12. R2P Monitor, Issue 66, 1 September 2023
- Author:
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Abstract:
- R2P Monitor is a quarterly publication applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 66 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nicaragua, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Haiti, South Sudan and Yemen.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Nicaragua, Haiti, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso
13. A Framework for Action for the Responsibility to Protect: A Resource for States
- Author:
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Abstract:
- The Responsibility to Protect populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing has emerged as an important global principle since the adoption of the UN World Summit Outcome Document in 2005. Since the conception of R2P, individual states and regional organizations, the UN, civil society, and experts around the world have worked to establish what implementation of R2P and the prevention of mass atrocity crimes means in practice. The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect and the Asia-Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect have developed a guide for states on steps to take to protect populations from atrocity crimes, at home and abroad. “A Framework for Action for the Responsibility to Protect: A Resource for States” consolidates and builds upon existing expertise from published works and best practice from states, regional organizations and the UN on how to prevent and respond to atrocity crimes. We encourage all states to utilize this framework to assess gaps and identify opportunities to address atrocity risks in their own countries, as well as to understand options available for responding to risks in their region and around the world.
- Topic:
- International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Atrocity Prevention, and Risk Assessment
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
14. R2P Monitor, Issue 65, 1 June 2023
- Author:
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Abstract:
- R2P Monitor is a quarterly publication applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 65 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nicaragua, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Mozambique, South Sudan and Yemen.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Nicaragua, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso
15. R2P Monitor, Issue 64, 1 March 2023
- Author:
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- 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 64 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Mozambique, South Sudan, Sudan and Yemen.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso
16. Future-proofing EU security and defence cooperation in the Indo-Pacific
- Author:
- Dylan Macchiarini Crosson, Stefania Benaglia, and Linus Vermeulen
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s war against Ukraine has led policymakers to re-prioritise the European security architecture and the EU’s neighbourhood, including a positive reassessment of NATO’s role as a reliable security provider. As the transatlantic relationship and the Indo-Pacific are inherently intertwined, this once again highlights the imperative of the EU making the Indo-Pacific a strategic priority. This presents the EU with an opportunity to project its values, interests and power, though hampered at present by political infighting and the mushrooming of conflicts in and around Europe. Still, the time has come for the EU to assess how it should adjust its approach to Indo-Pacific security. How can the EU effectively strike a balance in security and defence cooperation with partners to uphold key principles of international law and order without endorsing the idea that ‘might makes right’ in the Indo-Pacific?
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, International Cooperation, International Law, and Defense Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Indo-Pacific
17. Playing the Long Game in the South China Sea
- Author:
- Andrew Mantong
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
- Abstract:
- In the South China Sea (SCS), as indeed the wider Indo-Pacific, the EU is facing a deepening strategic rivalry between China and the US. In the SCS, China has been able to create physical realities in defiance of international law by constructing artificial islands in the attempt to sustain its claims to the disputed Spratly and Paracel archipelagos as well as expand its military projection deep into international waters. The US is still the predominant security player in the Indo-Pacific, but its military presence has an increasingly hard time shoring up American power in the SCS. The security dilemma between the great powers is threatening rules-based multilateralism, which runs deep in the veins of the EU and to a great extent defines its international posture.
- Topic:
- Security, International Cooperation, International Law, European Union, Multilateralism, and ASEAN
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Asia, Indo-Pacific, and South China Sea
18. Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine-Israel Discourse
- Author:
- Race and Rights (CSRR) Center for Security
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
- Abstract:
- A bastion of free speech, individual liberty, and equality. This is the mantra our government repeats across the world and teaches nationwide in American schools. Rarely stated, however, are the varying limitations imposed on persons seeking to exercise such rights according to their identity. Protection of fundamental rights is at its zenith when exercised by white, Judeo-Christian communities, while exceptions are frequently invoked when racial or ethnic minorities exercise the same rights to challenge policies and laws harmful to their communities. Members of the majority engaged in dissent are treated as patriots with different political views. Minorities who dissent are treated as security and cultural threats deserving of social stigma at best or criminalization at worst.1 This racialized double standard is most acute for Muslim or Arab Americans when they exercise their free speech rights to criticize the U.S. government’s failure to hold Israel accountable for its systematic violations of Palestinians’ human rights. Often repeated statements in support of Israel across U.S. administrations stand as a reminder of Israel’s central place in U.S. foreign policy. A most recent example occurred in Jerusalem on July 14, 2022 when President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid issued a joint statement declaring: “The United States and Israel reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between our two countries and the enduring commitment of the United States to Israel’s security. Our countries further reaffirm that the strategic U.S.-Israel partnership is based on a bedrock of shared values, shared interests, and true friendship.”2 Among the countless analyses expounding on the strong bond between the U.S. and Israel in policy terms, few examine the relationship between Islamophobia and U.S. policy on Palestine-Israel.3 Specifically, when Muslims and Arabs in America defend the rights of Palestinians or criticize Israeli state policy, they are often baselessly presumed to be motivated by a hatred for Jews rather than support for human rights, freedom, and consistent enforcement of international law. The resulting harm occurs at the individual and systemic level. Systemically, informed and critical debate about U.S. foreign policy is hampered by censorship campaigns targeting college students, faculty, human rights organizations, journalists, and elected officials.4 Individually, Muslim and Arab Americans are defamed and effectively excluded from critical public debates pertaining to U.S. policies executed in their names and with their tax funds. Should Arabs and Muslims exercise their constitutional rights of free speech and assembly in defense of Palestinian human rights, they frequently become targets of aggressive intimidation, harassment, and blacklisting campaigns5 in their workplaces, towns, and universities.6 This report examines how Islamophobia shapes American foreign policy in the three following ways: 1) restricting open debate about unconditional U.S. support for Israel notwithstanding documented and systematic violations of international law by the Israeli government,7 2) perpetuating racist tropes that Muslims and Arabs innately hate Jews, and 3) discrediting the Palestinian people from realizing their full civil, political, national, and human rights. Such racialized foreign and domestic policy was brought into sharp relief in 2022, with the response in the United States and Europe to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. As Americans in and out of government united in supporting the political, civil, and national rights and defense of Ukraine and Ukrainians, the approach in Washington to similar Palestinian interests ranges, with a few exceptions, from qualified, muted neutrality to outright hostile opposition.8 Such double standards prompt multiple questions that reveal how race and racism infect foreign policy and the treatment of minority communities who espouse unpopular views or dissent from the political orthodoxy, including the defense of human rights for all. What role does Islamophobia play in the formation of policies that restrict Palestinians from the same right of self-determination that are celebrated for Ukrainians and Israelis? How does Islamophobia silence and punish Muslim and Arab Americans who defend Palestinians’ rights in universities, the media, the public square, and online? This report explores these questions by addressing three key components of Islamophobia and related (though not identical) anti-Palestinian racism. First, Islamophobia adversely shapes public discourse on Palestine in the United States, currently and predating the “War on Terror.” Racist stereotypes of Muslims as savage are deployed to promote discriminatory policies against Palestinians. Second, an ecosystem of Zionist institutions and prominent individuals perpetuate Islamophobia to promote the policies and goals of Israel in its theft and occupation of Palestinian territory, decades of dispossession and marginalization of the Palestinian people, and denial of the rights of Palestinian refugees. Finally, Islamophobia is juxtaposed against antisemitism, portraying Muslims globally and domestically as agents of antisemitism; attempting to create a competition, or even a zero-sum scenario between Muslims and Jews–rather than allowing principled opposition to both antisemitism and Islamophobia to unite joint social justice struggles. As a result, legitimate efforts to combat antisemitism are disingenuously co-opted to undermine Palestinian aspirations for self-determination and human rights, as well as to defame Muslim and Arab human rights defenders as inherently antisemitic. Palestinian aspirations are often portrayed by the media and Zionist organizations as a cover for a uniquely Arab and Muslim antisemitism. Related is the tendency to pathologize Palestinians and all aspects of their political, cultural and social lives. This both stigmatizes the very idea of civil, national, and human rights of Palestinians and attempts to censor Arab and Muslim Americans’ political activism. Discrediting any criticism of Israeli state practices violating Palestinian human rights as antisemitism overlooks the growing number of Jews and Muslims working together to promote Palestinian rights.9 Concerns of American supporters of Israel, including Jewish Americans who have a deeply personal stake in the well-being of the Jewish people of Israel, and American supporters of Palestinians, who have an equally deep and personal stake in the well-being of the Palestinian people in Palestine, are not equally considered when crafting American policy in the region. Islamophobia, though far from being the sole reason for U.S. policy exceptionalizing Palestine, is a substantial factor. In turn, Muslims or Arabs (who are often mistaken as all Muslim) who criticize America’s unconditional support for Israeli state practices, regardless of the human rights implications, are immediately ostracized as antisemitic. The consequent harm is twofold: Palestinians’ lives and rights are discounted, and Muslim and Arab Americans are denied meaningful participation in public discourse on U.S. foreign policy and the ability to exercise their free speech rights.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Minorities, Freedom of Expression, Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism, Discourse, Racism, Self-Determination, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims
- Political Geography:
- Israel, Palestine, and United States of America
19. Punishing Atrocities and Fair Trials: From Nuremberg to Global Terrorism w/Prof. Jonathan Hafetz
- Author:
- Jonathan Hafetz
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
- Abstract:
- Prosecuting individuals who commit mass crimes is an important duty of states. Since World War II, an increasingly elaborate domestic and international legal framework has emerged for trying and punishing atrocities. But it is important that the rights of the accused are protected in the process. This lecture will examine the challenge of ensuring fair trials, with particular attention on the long shadow cast by the U.S. War on Terrorism, which continues to reverberate across Arab and Muslim communities today.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Terrorism, History, War on Terror, and Atrocities
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
20. Syria returns to the Arab League
- Author:
- Sara Nowacka
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The decision to restore Syria’s membership in the Arab League (AL) is aimed at Arab states gaining greater control over the situation in the region and reducing external influence, including that of the West. Although the AL imposed a number of obligations on Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, such as holding elections, it is doubtful whether the League can enforce them. The organisation’s decision to normalise relations with Syria will be used to undermine the effectiveness of the sanctions in counteracting violations of international law, also in the context of the Russian aggression against Ukraine.
- Topic:
- International Law, Sanctions, Syrian War, Normalization, Bashar al-Assad, Arab League, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Arab Countries and Syria