妇女、儿童和大象为武力辩护

G. Heathcote
{"title":"妇女、儿童和大象为武力辩护","authors":"G. Heathcote","doi":"10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the use of force described as ‘robust peacekeeping’. Through a review of innovation in Security Council practice – in particular, thematic resolutions, targeted sanctions and robust peacekeeping – the role normative assertions of the Council play in underpinning new forms of force are assessed. Understood in this context, feminists and others who have agitated for inclusion within the work of the Security Council are counselled against pursuing projects that expand the powers of the institution while there remains a lack of checks on how force is mobilised. The reluctance of feminist and/or critical engagement to address the structural aspects of institutional spaces, such as the Security Council, consequently risks a legitimation of the institution without significant gains in terms of gender equality or, if viewed through recent resolutions establishing targeted sanctions against wildlife poachers, for the protection of elephants.","PeriodicalId":37206,"journal":{"name":"Journal on the Use of Force and International Law","volume":"4 1","pages":"66 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women and children and elephants as justification for force\",\"authors\":\"G. Heathcote\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article examines the use of force described as ‘robust peacekeeping’. Through a review of innovation in Security Council practice – in particular, thematic resolutions, targeted sanctions and robust peacekeeping – the role normative assertions of the Council play in underpinning new forms of force are assessed. Understood in this context, feminists and others who have agitated for inclusion within the work of the Security Council are counselled against pursuing projects that expand the powers of the institution while there remains a lack of checks on how force is mobilised. The reluctance of feminist and/or critical engagement to address the structural aspects of institutional spaces, such as the Security Council, consequently risks a legitimation of the institution without significant gains in terms of gender equality or, if viewed through recent resolutions establishing targeted sanctions against wildlife poachers, for the protection of elephants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal on the Use of Force and International Law\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"66 - 85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal on the Use of Force and International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal on the Use of Force and International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20531702.2017.1294929","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要本文探讨了被称为“强有力的维和”的武力使用。通过审查安全理事会做法的创新,特别是专题决议、有针对性的制裁和强有力的维和行动,评估了安理会的规范性主张在支持新形式的武力方面发挥的作用。在这一背景下,女权主义者和其他鼓动将其纳入安理会工作的人被建议不要推行扩大安理会权力的项目,同时仍然缺乏对如何调动武力的检查。女权主义者和(或)批判性参与不愿解决安全理事会等机构空间的结构性问题,因此有可能使该机构合法化,而不会在性别平等方面取得重大进展,或者,如果从最近针对野生动物偷猎者制定有针对性制裁的决议来看,也不会在保护大象方面取得重大成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Women and children and elephants as justification for force
ABSTRACT This article examines the use of force described as ‘robust peacekeeping’. Through a review of innovation in Security Council practice – in particular, thematic resolutions, targeted sanctions and robust peacekeeping – the role normative assertions of the Council play in underpinning new forms of force are assessed. Understood in this context, feminists and others who have agitated for inclusion within the work of the Security Council are counselled against pursuing projects that expand the powers of the institution while there remains a lack of checks on how force is mobilised. The reluctance of feminist and/or critical engagement to address the structural aspects of institutional spaces, such as the Security Council, consequently risks a legitimation of the institution without significant gains in terms of gender equality or, if viewed through recent resolutions establishing targeted sanctions against wildlife poachers, for the protection of elephants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Quashing protests abroad: The CSTO’s intervention in Kazakhstan Intervention by invitation and the scope of state consent Anticipatory consent to military intervention: analysis in the wake of the coup d’état in Niger in 2023 The war in Ukraine and legal limitations on Russian vetoes Digest of state practice: 1 January – 30 June 2023
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1