The Islamic Bloc at the United Nations Human Rights Council
- Authors: Rist, Duncan Graham
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: United Nations Human Rights Council , Organisation of Islamic Cooperation , International relations , International relations -- Moral and ethical aspects , Political leadership -- Moral and ethical aspects , Power (Social sciences) -- United States , Human rights -- International cooperation , Liberalism -- International cooperation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/142759 , vital:38114
- Description: Uncertainty as to the future of the liberal international order and the position of the United States within an international system in which it is not the hegemon remains a topic of debate amongst scholars of International Relations (Acharya: 2017; Duncombe and Dunne: 2018; Ikenberry: 2009, 2011, 2014; Nye: 2012 and Monteiro: 2011/2012). Fukuyama’s (1989: 4) “end of history” has not happened and a resurgence of populist leaders within established liberal democratic countries has contributed to a rapid decline of moral and ethical leadership and has further compromised the future of the liberal international order (Duncombe and Dunne, 2018: 27). As the relative power of the United States declines and the future of the liberal international order becomes increasingly uncertain, support for its future must be sought from outside the West (Duncombe and Dunne, 2018: 25 and Ikenberry: 2009). This thesis seeks to locate where potential non-Western support for the future liberal international order may be found. It does so through an analysis of how Islamic states who are part of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation vote on the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The OIC has a significant presence at the UNHRC and can influence the direction of the liberal international human rights regime. The evidence examined in this research project suggests that the future liberal international order and human rights regime can indeed expect some form of cooperation from the OIC. However, the OIC, and by extension Islamic states, would likely offer more support at least for human rights, if a more common understanding were to be found.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Rist, Duncan Graham
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: United Nations Human Rights Council , Organisation of Islamic Cooperation , International relations , International relations -- Moral and ethical aspects , Political leadership -- Moral and ethical aspects , Power (Social sciences) -- United States , Human rights -- International cooperation , Liberalism -- International cooperation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/142759 , vital:38114
- Description: Uncertainty as to the future of the liberal international order and the position of the United States within an international system in which it is not the hegemon remains a topic of debate amongst scholars of International Relations (Acharya: 2017; Duncombe and Dunne: 2018; Ikenberry: 2009, 2011, 2014; Nye: 2012 and Monteiro: 2011/2012). Fukuyama’s (1989: 4) “end of history” has not happened and a resurgence of populist leaders within established liberal democratic countries has contributed to a rapid decline of moral and ethical leadership and has further compromised the future of the liberal international order (Duncombe and Dunne, 2018: 27). As the relative power of the United States declines and the future of the liberal international order becomes increasingly uncertain, support for its future must be sought from outside the West (Duncombe and Dunne, 2018: 25 and Ikenberry: 2009). This thesis seeks to locate where potential non-Western support for the future liberal international order may be found. It does so through an analysis of how Islamic states who are part of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation vote on the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The OIC has a significant presence at the UNHRC and can influence the direction of the liberal international human rights regime. The evidence examined in this research project suggests that the future liberal international order and human rights regime can indeed expect some form of cooperation from the OIC. However, the OIC, and by extension Islamic states, would likely offer more support at least for human rights, if a more common understanding were to be found.
- Full Text:
The principle of distinction and modern armed conflicts: a critical analysis of the protection regime based on the distinction between civilians and combatants under international humanitarian law
- Authors: Chigowe, Lloyd Tonderai
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Humanitarian law , Military art and science -- Law and legislation , Combatants and noncombatants (International law) , Military law , National security -- Law and legislation , Private military companies (International law) , Human rights -- International cooperation , Soft law
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4668 , vital:20710
- Description: This thesis interrogates the applicability of the principle of distinction in modern armed conflicts. The distinction between combatants and civilians and between civilian objects and military objectives has become blurred as a result of the changes that have taken place in modern armed conflicts. While the principle of distinction was tailor made to regulate traditional, conventional armed conflicts, an evolution in the nature, means and methods of warfare has made the application of the principle of distinction challenging. One of the challenges that arise as a result of the changes that have taken place in modern armed conflicts include the difficulty of distinguishing civilians and civilian objects, which are entitled to protection under international humanitarian law from combatants and military objectives which are legitimate targets. This has compromised the protection that the law seeks to offer during armed conflicts since civilians and civilian objects have become constant targets. Another challenge is that the involvement of civilian persons in armed conflicts has made it difficult to determine the responsibility of these individuals as well as the states that hire them for violations of international law during armed conflicts. Furthermore, the emergence of new methods of warfare has resulted in many objects and facilities that are traditionally regarded as civilian objects becoming military objectives, thus losing their protection under international humanitarian law. This thesis will use the examples of the involvement of private military and security companies in armed conflicts as well as the emergence of drone and cyber warfare to illustrate these challenges. The study will examine the application of the principle of distinction to the growing practice of outsourcing of military services to Private Military and Security Companies. Firstly, the study will examine the status of PMSC personnel under the principle of distinction, that is whether they qualify as combatants or civilians. The study will then examine the consequences of PMSC personnel’s participation in armed conflicts. Importantly, the study will explore responsibilities of states that hire private military and security personnel, PMSC companies as well as superiors in charge of PMSC personnel for any violation of international law committed by contractors during armed conflicts. The study will also examine the application of the principle of distinction to drone and cyber warfare. The study will examine the status of drone and cyber operators under the principle of distinction as well as the applicability of the principle of distinction between civilian objects and military objectives in drone and cyber warfare. The study will discuss some of the problems that arise as result of the introduction of these new methods of warfare, which makes the application of the principle of distinction to modern armed conflicts challenging. The thesis concludes by arguing that while the principle of distinction remains an indispensable concept of international humanitarian law, it needs to be adapted for it to be applicable to modern armed conflicts. Therefore, suggestions shall be made on how the principle can be adapted to ensure that it remains relevant to modern armed conflicts.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Chigowe, Lloyd Tonderai
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Humanitarian law , Military art and science -- Law and legislation , Combatants and noncombatants (International law) , Military law , National security -- Law and legislation , Private military companies (International law) , Human rights -- International cooperation , Soft law
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4668 , vital:20710
- Description: This thesis interrogates the applicability of the principle of distinction in modern armed conflicts. The distinction between combatants and civilians and between civilian objects and military objectives has become blurred as a result of the changes that have taken place in modern armed conflicts. While the principle of distinction was tailor made to regulate traditional, conventional armed conflicts, an evolution in the nature, means and methods of warfare has made the application of the principle of distinction challenging. One of the challenges that arise as a result of the changes that have taken place in modern armed conflicts include the difficulty of distinguishing civilians and civilian objects, which are entitled to protection under international humanitarian law from combatants and military objectives which are legitimate targets. This has compromised the protection that the law seeks to offer during armed conflicts since civilians and civilian objects have become constant targets. Another challenge is that the involvement of civilian persons in armed conflicts has made it difficult to determine the responsibility of these individuals as well as the states that hire them for violations of international law during armed conflicts. Furthermore, the emergence of new methods of warfare has resulted in many objects and facilities that are traditionally regarded as civilian objects becoming military objectives, thus losing their protection under international humanitarian law. This thesis will use the examples of the involvement of private military and security companies in armed conflicts as well as the emergence of drone and cyber warfare to illustrate these challenges. The study will examine the application of the principle of distinction to the growing practice of outsourcing of military services to Private Military and Security Companies. Firstly, the study will examine the status of PMSC personnel under the principle of distinction, that is whether they qualify as combatants or civilians. The study will then examine the consequences of PMSC personnel’s participation in armed conflicts. Importantly, the study will explore responsibilities of states that hire private military and security personnel, PMSC companies as well as superiors in charge of PMSC personnel for any violation of international law committed by contractors during armed conflicts. The study will also examine the application of the principle of distinction to drone and cyber warfare. The study will examine the status of drone and cyber operators under the principle of distinction as well as the applicability of the principle of distinction between civilian objects and military objectives in drone and cyber warfare. The study will discuss some of the problems that arise as result of the introduction of these new methods of warfare, which makes the application of the principle of distinction to modern armed conflicts challenging. The thesis concludes by arguing that while the principle of distinction remains an indispensable concept of international humanitarian law, it needs to be adapted for it to be applicable to modern armed conflicts. Therefore, suggestions shall be made on how the principle can be adapted to ensure that it remains relevant to modern armed conflicts.
- Full Text:
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »