Pub Date : 2022-10-25DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25030004
A. Tchie
Over the last few years, successful military operations across Somalia have helped to unshackle towns south of Mogadishu from al Shabaab, demonstrating the capacity of the African Union Mission to Somalia (amisom) to achieve parts of its mandate. However, friction between the Federal Government of Somalia and the Federal Member States have heightened tensions and rifts over elections, state management and overall security, despite significant international support. Despite amisom s efforts, the legacies of the 1990s civil war have remained unresolved, and state restoration has been disrupted by political, clannish, environmental and structural challenges. In contrast, al Shabaab remains adaptable, resilient and exploits grievances, local dynamics, and competition over resources. This paper argues, the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council needs to re-mandate and reinforce amisom in conjunction with an AU stabilisation strategy for Somalia which exploits experiences from the AU’s Regional Stabilisation Strategy for the Lake Chad Basin.
{"title":"Waging Peace, towards an Africa Union Stabilisation Strategy for Somalia","authors":"A. Tchie","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25030004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25030004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Over the last few years, successful military operations across Somalia have helped to unshackle towns south of Mogadishu from al Shabaab, demonstrating the capacity of the African Union Mission to Somalia (amisom) to achieve parts of its mandate. However, friction between the Federal Government of Somalia and the Federal Member States have heightened tensions and rifts over elections, state management and overall security, despite significant international support. Despite amisom s efforts, the legacies of the 1990s civil war have remained unresolved, and state restoration has been disrupted by political, clannish, environmental and structural challenges. In contrast, al Shabaab remains adaptable, resilient and exploits grievances, local dynamics, and competition over resources. This paper argues, the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council needs to re-mandate and reinforce amisom in conjunction with an AU stabilisation strategy for Somalia which exploits experiences from the AU’s Regional Stabilisation Strategy for the Lake Chad Basin.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41375118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-25DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25030003
P. Diehl, Oliver P. Richmond
Peace operations and associated peacekeeping research have changed dramatically over time. This article reviews the extent to which two prominent strands of peacekeeping research – behavioral-quantitative/quantitative and critical – have reflected changes in peacekeeping practice. Following critiques of how these approaches have fallen short, the article provides a research agenda for each research approach. The article concludes by addressing ways in which the two approaches might be bridged and the barriers to such collaboration therein.
{"title":"The Changing Face(s) of Peace Operations: Critical and Behavioral-Quantitative Paths for Future Research","authors":"P. Diehl, Oliver P. Richmond","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25030003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25030003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Peace operations and associated peacekeeping research have changed dramatically over time. This article reviews the extent to which two prominent strands of peacekeeping research – behavioral-quantitative/quantitative and critical – have reflected changes in peacekeeping practice. Following critiques of how these approaches have fallen short, the article provides a research agenda for each research approach. The article concludes by addressing ways in which the two approaches might be bridged and the barriers to such collaboration therein.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45588195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020008
Mason Richey, Leif-Eric Easley
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violated international norms more than many thought imaginable in the year 2022, but the global effort to aid Kyiv has also exceeded expectations. Where does this leave the international order? In terms of peace and security, the order is not destroyed but fractured; global political economics are not de-coupled but more disjointed; and non-traditional security cooperation may be increasing but supply is falling further behind demand. Defeating Russian aggression is only the beginning of an uncertain order rebuilding project involving efforts at more coordinated trade standards, principled engagement with China, and institutionalized cooperation on transnational threats, including climate change.
{"title":"Russia Attacks and the International Order Strikes Back","authors":"Mason Richey, Leif-Eric Easley","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violated international norms more than many thought imaginable in the year 2022, but the global effort to aid Kyiv has also exceeded expectations. Where does this leave the international order? In terms of peace and security, the order is not destroyed but fractured; global political economics are not de-coupled but more disjointed; and non-traditional security cooperation may be increasing but supply is falling further behind demand. Defeating Russian aggression is only the beginning of an uncertain order rebuilding project involving efforts at more coordinated trade standards, principled engagement with China, and institutionalized cooperation on transnational threats, including climate change.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43883116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020007
T. Paige
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has once again brought the question of the limits of the veto by the P5 in the UN Security Council into the spotlight. This short piece examines the possibility of the veto power of the P5 being restricted and the possibility of reform of the UN Charter to restrict or abolish the veto. After concluding that the drafting of the Charter makes these approaches unworkable it then considers the possibility of the UN being reformed under a new Charter that has a more equitable Security Council – concluding that such an approach is functionally impossible.
{"title":"Mission: Impossible? Reforming the UN Charter to Limit the Veto","authors":"T. Paige","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The Russian invasion of Ukraine has once again brought the question of the limits of the veto by the P5 in the UN Security Council into the spotlight. This short piece examines the possibility of the veto power of the P5 being restricted and the possibility of reform of the UN Charter to restrict or abolish the veto. After concluding that the drafting of the Charter makes these approaches unworkable it then considers the possibility of the UN being reformed under a new Charter that has a more equitable Security Council – concluding that such an approach is functionally impossible.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45421552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020006
R. Atadjanov
The issue of the necessity to bring those responsible for the commission of crimes under international law during the ongoing international armed conflict in Ukraine, i.e., the aggressive war of the Russian Federation against sovereign Ukraine, does not raise any principal questions or doubts on the side of the international community. It is the matter of an appropriate forum, or fora to do so that needs to be properly addressed. This piece looks at possible judicial venues for holding the main ringleader of the aggressive war, namely, the President of the Russian Federation, and his closest high-ranking officials personally accountable for core crimes as a matter of individual criminal responsibility. Prospects for three judicial mechanisms, either already existing or potential, are reviewed and brief reflections are offered as to the realistic scenarios for each of those mechanisms given the status quo and ongoing developments.
{"title":"Holding the Aggressor Accountable","authors":"R. Atadjanov","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The issue of the necessity to bring those responsible for the commission of crimes under international law during the ongoing international armed conflict in Ukraine, i.e., the aggressive war of the Russian Federation against sovereign Ukraine, does not raise any principal questions or doubts on the side of the international community. It is the matter of an appropriate forum, or fora to do so that needs to be properly addressed. This piece looks at possible judicial venues for holding the main ringleader of the aggressive war, namely, the President of the Russian Federation, and his closest high-ranking officials personally accountable for core crimes as a matter of individual criminal responsibility. Prospects for three judicial mechanisms, either already existing or potential, are reviewed and brief reflections are offered as to the realistic scenarios for each of those mechanisms given the status quo and ongoing developments.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44057910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020001
B. Kondoch
{"title":"Letter to the Readers","authors":"B. Kondoch","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43301273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020005
R. Barber
This article considers what the responsibility to protect populations from atrocity crimes (R2P) requires States to do in Ukraine. It begins by considering how the R2P’s ‘three-pillar’ implementation strategy is to be understood in relation to a situation in which atrocities are being perpetrated not by a State against its own population but by an aggressor State; and then considers the parallels between what is required of States by the political commitment to the R2P, and what is required by the legal obligations to prevent genocide and to cooperate to end serious breaches of peremptory norms. The second part of the article then considers a series of options that may be pursued by States in fulfilment of their R2P and corresponding legal obligations, from options falling short of military intervention (including legal proceedings, economic and diplomatic sanctions and military assistance) through to the possibilities of unilateral military intervention and UN peacekeeping.
{"title":"What Does the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ Require of States in Ukraine?","authors":"R. Barber","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article considers what the responsibility to protect populations from atrocity crimes (R2P) requires States to do in Ukraine. It begins by considering how the R2P’s ‘three-pillar’ implementation strategy is to be understood in relation to a situation in which atrocities are being perpetrated not by a State against its own population but by an aggressor State; and then considers the parallels between what is required of States by the political commitment to the R2P, and what is required by the legal obligations to prevent genocide and to cooperate to end serious breaches of peremptory norms. The second part of the article then considers a series of options that may be pursued by States in fulfilment of their R2P and corresponding legal obligations, from options falling short of military intervention (including legal proceedings, economic and diplomatic sanctions and military assistance) through to the possibilities of unilateral military intervention and UN peacekeeping.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45420101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020002
T. D. Gill
This editorial commentary examines the justifications put forward by the Russian government for its “special military operation” against the background of the law governing the use of force (jus ad bellum). It also addresses the relevance of that body of law in light of what has transpired since the Russian invasion of Ukraine commenced.
{"title":"The Jus ad Bellum and Russia’s “Special Military Operation” in Ukraine","authors":"T. D. Gill","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This editorial commentary examines the justifications put forward by the Russian government for its “special military operation” against the background of the law governing the use of force (jus ad bellum). It also addresses the relevance of that body of law in light of what has transpired since the Russian invasion of Ukraine commenced.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42173159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020003
S. Sayapin
Since 24 February 2022, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has entailed large-scale violations of international humanitarian law (ihl), which are being investigated by Ukraine, some of its European allies, and the International Criminal Court (icc) as war crimes. This short commentary provides an overview of selected jus in bello issues raised by the invasion, and highlights implications for the dissemination and implementation of ihl in Russia, Ukraine and beyond in a mid-term perspective.
{"title":"A Short Commentary Concerning Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and the Jus in Bello","authors":"S. Sayapin","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Since 24 February 2022, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has entailed large-scale violations of international humanitarian law (ihl), which are being investigated by Ukraine, some of its European allies, and the International Criminal Court (icc) as war crimes. This short commentary provides an overview of selected jus in bello issues raised by the invasion, and highlights implications for the dissemination and implementation of ihl in Russia, Ukraine and beyond in a mid-term perspective.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44015173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1163/18754112-25020004
N. Quenivet
Since the beginning of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that started on 24 February 2022 accusations of genocide have been levelled against each other by both sides. This article focuses on the claim that Russia is carrying out a genocide in Ukraine. After explaining the concept of genocide and the legal consequences of such qualification, the article applies the law to the situation, drawing the conclusion that, based on the current information, it does not appear that a genocide is being committed as, so far, no dolus specialis can be identified.
{"title":"The Conflict in Ukraine and Genocide","authors":"N. Quenivet","doi":"10.1163/18754112-25020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Since the beginning of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that started on 24 February 2022 accusations of genocide have been levelled against each other by both sides. This article focuses on the claim that Russia is carrying out a genocide in Ukraine. After explaining the concept of genocide and the legal consequences of such qualification, the article applies the law to the situation, drawing the conclusion that, based on the current information, it does not appear that a genocide is being committed as, so far, no dolus specialis can be identified.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45943139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：