This collection interrogates the representation of humanitarian crisis and catastrophe, and the refraction of humanitarian intervention and action, from the mid-twentieth century to the present, across a diverse range of media forms: traditional and contemporary screen media (film, television and online video) as well as newspapers, memoirs, music festivals and social media platforms (such as Facebook, YouTube and Flickr). The book thus explores the historical, cultural and political contexts that have shaped the mediation of humanitarian relationships since the middle of the twentieth century. Together, the chapters illustrate the continuities and connections, as well as the differences, which have characterised the mediatisation of both states of emergency and acts of amelioration. The authors reveal and explore the significant synergies between the humanitarian enterprise, the endeavour to alleviate the suffering of particular groups, and media representations, and their modes of addressing and appealing to specific publics. The chapters consider the ways in which media texts, technologies and practices reflect and shape the shifting moral, political, ethical, rhetorical, ideological and material dimensions of international humanitarian emergency and intervention, and have become integral to the changing relationships between organisations, institutions, governments, individual actors and entire sectors.
You're not logged in.
You're not logged in.
You're not logged in.
You're not logged in.
The chapter explores the development of strategic planning in Russia and closely associated issues, such as the network of situation centres and a “single information space” making possible their close interaction as an aid to the country’s strategic management.
There was little interest in strategic planning during the 1990s when market transformation was underway, but after Vladimir Putin became president the situation changed, and in 2009 he issued a major edict calling for the development of an integrated system of strategic planning and a network of situation centres. The intention was to create a system that would link strategies for socio-economic development with measures to ensure the country’s national security. Work started on a Law on Strategic Planning, finally signed into law in 2014. Since then, many concepts, foundations, forecasts, strategies, and programmes have appeared at federal, regional, and local levels. Presidential structures, government, and federal ministries have created a system of distributed situation centres, now being developed also at the regional level. But the systems face problems: the desired combined focus on development and national security has not been realised. The pace of development of strategic planning has slowed, and reconsideration is now underway of some of the institutions and procedures. The pursuit of a strategic approach to governance in a rapidly changing world is not as simple as initially thought, but a serious commitment to strategy remains an essential feature of the exercise of power in present-day Russia that is not always appreciated in the West.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 245 | 104 | 9 |
| Full Text Views | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PDF Downloads | 0 | 0 | 0 |
This study explores the normative dimension of the evolving role of the United Nations in peace and security and, ultimately, in governance. What is dealt with here is both the UN's changing raison d'être and the wider normative context within which the organisation is located. The study looks at the UN through the window of one of its most contentious, yet least understood, practices: active involvement in intra-state conflicts as epitomised by UN peacekeeping. Drawing on the conceptual tools provided by the ‘historical structural’ approach, it seeks to understand how and why the international community continuously reinterprets or redefines the UN's role with regard to such conflicts. The study concentrates on intra-state ‘peacekeeping environments’, and examines what changes, if any, have occurred to the normative basis of UN peacekeeping in intra-state conflicts from the early 1960s to the early 1990s. One of the original aspects of the study is its analytical framework, where the conceptualisation of ‘normative basis’ revolves around objectives, functions and authority, and is closely connected with the institutionalised values in the UN Charter such as state sovereignty, human rights and socio-economic development.
Limiting institutions?
The challenge of Eurasian security governance
Eurasian security governance has received increasing attention since 1989. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the institution that best served the security interests of the West in its competition with the Soviet Union, is now relatively ill-equipped resolve the threats emanating from Eurasia to the Atlantic system of security governance. This book investigates the important role played by identity politics in the shaping of the Eurasian security environment. It investigates both the state in post-Soviet Eurasia as the primary site of institutionalisation and the state's concerted international action in the sphere of security. This investigation requires a major caveat: state-centric approaches to security impose analytical costs by obscuring substate and transnational actors and processes. The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon marked the maturation of what had been described as the 'new terrorism'. Jervis has argued that the western system of security governance produced a security community that was contingent upon five necessary and sufficient conditions. The United States has made an effort to integrate China, Russia into the Atlantic security system via the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. The Black Sea Economic Cooperation has become engaged in disseminating security concerns in fields such as environment, energy and economy. If the end of the Cold War left America triumphant, Russia's new geopolitical hand seemed a terrible demotion. Successfully rebalancing the West and building a collaborative system with Russia, China, Europe and America probably requires more wisdom and skill from the world's leaders.