is still probably true that for the wider world, the paradigm case – the image – of self-determination is accession to independence, formatting a new State in the mould of existing ones. The gods in this legal pantheon of self-determination have been accounted for in the present work: the UN Charter, Articles 1(2) and 55, and Chapters XI and XII; and General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) (the Colonial Declaration), 1541 (XV) and 2625 (XXV) (the Declaration on Principles of International Law). There is more ambiguity from the decolonisation or post-colonial State
expressed, albeit in the more indirect language of UN resolutions, by member states. In 1994, a General Assembly resolution emphasising that a ‘visible commitment of the Secretary-General is essential to the achievement of the targets set by the General Assembly’, 131 noted ‘with concern’ that the current rate of increase in women’s employment in the UN was insufficient to achieve the
(RES 69/28)’ (2014), p. 1 https://s3.amazonaws.com/unoda-web/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Germany.pdf (accessed 29 March 2022); Georgia, ‘UN General Assembly Resolution 68/243’ (2014), pp. 5–6 https://unoda-web.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/07/Georgia.pdf (accessed 26 August 2017); Information Security Policy Council (Japan), ‘International Strategy on Cybersecurity
Refiguring childhood stages a series of encounters with biosocial power, which is a specific zone of intensity within the more encompassing arena of biopower and biopolitics. Assembled at the intersection of thought and practice, biosocial power attempts to bring envisioned futures into the present, taking hold of life in the form of childhood, thereby bridging being and becoming while also shaping the power relations that encapsulate the social and cultural world(s) of adults and children. Taking up a critical perspective which is attentive to the contingency of childhoods – the ways in which particular childhoods are constituted and configured – the method used in the book is a transversal genealogy that moves between past and present while also crossing a series of discourses and practices framed by children’s rights (the right to play), citizenship, health, disadvantage and entrepreneurship education. The overarching analysis converges on contemporary neoliberal enterprise culture, which is approached as a conjuncture that helps to explain, and also to trouble, the growing emphasis on the agency and rights of children. It is against the backdrop of this problematic that the book makes its case for refiguring childhood. Focusing on the how, where and when of biosocial power, Refiguring childhood will appeal to researchers and students interested in examining the relationship between power and childhood through the lens of social and political theory, sociology, cultural studies, history and geography.
The Arab–Israeli conflict has been at the centre of international affairs for decades. Despite repeated political efforts, the confrontation and casualties continue, especially in fighting between Israelis and Palestinians. This new assessment emphasizes the role that military force plays in blocking a diplomatic resolution. Many Arabs and Israelis believe that the only way to survive or to be secure is through the development, threat, and use of military force and violence. This idea is deeply flawed and results in missed diplomatic opportunities and growing insecurity. Coercion cannot force rivals to sign a peace agreement to end a long-running conflict. Sometimes negotiations and mutual concessions are the key to improving the fate of a country or national movement. Using short historical case studies from the 1950s through to today, the book explores and pushes back against the dominant belief that military force leads to triumph while negotiations and concessions lead to defeat and further unwelcome challenges. In The sword is not enough, we learn both what makes this idea so compelling to Arab and Israeli leaders and how it eventually may get dislodged.
This book analyses the use of the past and the production of heritage through architectural design in the developmental context of Iran. It is the first of its kind to utilize a multidisciplinary approach in probing the complex relationship between architecture, development, and heritage. It uses established theoretical concepts including notions of globalism, nostalgia, tradition, and authenticity to show that development is a major cause of historical transformations in places such as Iran and its effects must be seen in relation to global political and historical exchanges as well as local specificities. Iran is a pertinent example as it has endured radical cultural and political shifts in the past five decades. Scholars of heritage and architecture will find the cross-disciplinary aspects of the book useful. The premise of the book is that transposed into other contexts, development, as a globalizing project originating in the West, instigates renewed forms of historical consciousness and imaginations of the past. This is particularly evident in architecture where, through design processes, the past produces forms of architectural heritage. But such historic consciousness cannot be reduced to political ideology, while politics is always in the background. The book shows this through chapters focusing on theoretical context, international exchanges made in architectural congresses in the 1970s, housing as the vehicle for everyday heritage, and symbolic public architecture intended to reflect monumental time. The book is written in accessible language to benefit academic researchers and graduate students in the fields of heritage, architecture, and Iranian and Middle Eastern studies.
voted for a Security Council resolution on 9 June, calling for Portugal to end colonialism.94 This was highly significant. The US publicly supported Angolan independence, much to the annoyance of Portugal, Britain and France, who abstained. The resolution also drew on General Assembly Resolution 1514 and directly condemned the repressive measures of the Portuguese authorities in Angola. It employed the language and terminology of the Committee of 24 in pointing to Portugal’s responsibilities regarding non-self-governing territories. It was interpreted by the
realistic possibility, something reaffirmed by Amorim nearly three decades later, it contained a geopolitical logic irresistible to security thinkers in the region. The pressure to pursue some sort of localized cooperation approach to maintaining security in the area was dramatically heightened by the Falklands/Malvinas War of 1982, which ultimately pushed Brazil in 1986 to propose and win approval of a UN General Assembly resolution creating ZOPACAS. By 1994 the members agreed to a relatively inexpensive, but highly symbolic step to retrench ZOPACAS by jointly declaring
hate speech. It reads: 21 Natan Lerner, The U.N. Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 2nd edn, 1980), p. 43. 22 Ibid., p. 47. In that respect, it was no different to the corresponding article in the earlier UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1904 (XVIII), 20 November 1963. 23 Patrick Thornberry, ‘International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination: The prohibition of “racist hate
signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989, www2.ohchr. org/english/law/crc.htm. (accessed 22.10.2014). 44 Mikaila Mariel Lemonik Arthur, ‘The neglected virtues of comparative-historical methods’, in Ieva Zake and Michaal De Cesare (eds), New Directions in Sociology: Essays on Theory and Methodology in the 21st Century (Jefferson/NC: McFarland, 2011), 172–92, here p. 172. 45 Ingvill C. Mochmann and Stein Ugelvik Larsen, ‘Kriegskinder in Europa’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 18–19 (2005), 34–8. 46 Heide