Risks and opportunities for conflict transformation
Maéva Clément, Anna Geis, and Hanna Pfeifer
Internal wars are the prevalent contemporary type of violent conflict (Sarkees and Wayman 2010 ). Many violent conflicts involve armed non-stateactors (ANSAs) such as insurgents, rebels, guerrillas, warlords, militias, paramilitaries and private security companies. In addition, the so-called ‘global war on terrorism’ indicates that transnational terrorist networks are considered to be one of the major security threats today. Whatever label is used for a certain armed actor by a government, official
This collection of chapters provides the most comprehensive study of the theory and practice on the contribution of international organisations and non-State actors to the formation of customary international law. It offers new practical and theoretical perspectives on one of the most complex questions about the making of international law, namely the possibility that actors other than states contribute to the making of customary international law. Notwithstanding the completion by the International Law Commission of its work on the identification of customary international law, the making of customary international law remains riddled with acute practical and theoretical controversies which have been left unresolved and which continue to be intensively debated in both practice and scholarship. Making extensively reference to the case-law of international law courts and tribunals as well as the practice of treaty-monitoring bodies while also engaging with the most recent scholarly work on customary international law, this new volume provides innovative tools and guidance to legal scholars, researchers in law, law students, lecturers in law, practitioners, legal advisers, judges, arbitrators, and counsels as well as tools to address contemporary questions of international law-making.
wants to do something to show we're not all wasting our time’ (BBC News 2020 ).
The singular declaration of a US president of the transformation of the Taliban from recognition as a terrorist organisation to a potential counterinsurgent highlights the powerful effect that acts of recognition, mis-recognition and non-recognition of armed non-stateactors (ANSAs) can have in the course of civil conflict. This is only one speech by a US leader in a long-lasting conflict, and it may not in the long run have an impact, but it was an unusually visible
question must be undertaken with a sense of legal right of obligation’, 5 implies that the relevant opinio juris is that of the actors whose practice counts, that is, again, of States and, sometimes, international organizations.
The place that the International Law Commission reserves to non-Stateactors in the formation of customary international law is therefore a marginal one. Their conduct does not count as the general practice ( usus longaevus ); their views do not qualify as the acceptance of the binding nature of the practice ( opinio juris ). At most, their
Non-stateactors and the quest for
authority in Arctic governance
The modern state, as discussed in Chapter 1, can be considered a relative newcomer to the cross-border politics of the Arctic region. However,
states have featured prominently in the preceding two chapters. We have
come to see how advantageous positions earned by/granted to states
vis-à-vis other states matter for shaping the rules of the road in Arctic
cooperative governance –and ultimately shape outcomes. In this chapter,
I seek to broaden the net to explore the positions of key non-state
, what the Commission did and did not say with regard to the role of international organizations and that of ‘non-Stateactors’, since some of the contributions in this volume (like one or two States in the UN General Assembly’s Sixth Committee) seem not to have fully appreciated what was said within the Commission or what the Commission itself actually said in its second reading texts. The Commission’s second reading in 2018 involved a detailed review of the earlier draft conclusions and commentaries (adopted on first reading in 2016) in light of comments received
In the social sciences, recognition is considered a means to de-escalate
conflicts and promote peaceful social interactions. This volume explores the
forms that social recognition and its withholding may take in asymmetric armed
conflicts. It discusses the short- and long-term risks and opportunities which
arise when local, state and transnational actors recognise armed non-state
actors (ANSAs), mis-recognise them or deny them recognition altogether. The
first part of the volume contextualises the politics of recognition in the case
of ANSAs. It provides a historical overview of recognition regimes since the
Second World War and their diverging impacts on ANSAs’ recognition claims. The
second part is dedicated to original case studies, centring on specific conflict
phases and covering ANSAs from all over the world. Some examine the politics of
recognition during armed conflicts, others in conflict stalemates, and others
still in mediation and peace processes. The third part of the volume discusses
how the politics of recognition impacts practitioners’ engagement with conflict
parties, gives an outlook on policies vis-à-vis ANSAs, and sketches
trajectories for future research in the field. The volume shows that, while
non-recognition prevents conflict transformation, the recognition of armed
non-state actors may produce counterproductive precedents and new modes of
exclusion in intra-state and transnational politics.
The purpose of this book is to critically enhance the appreciation of diplomacy
and sport in global affairs from the perspective of practitioners and scholars.
The book will make an important new contribution to at least two distinct
fields: diplomacy and sport, as well as to those concerned with history,
politics, sociology and international relations. The critical analysis the book
provides explores the linkages across these fields, particularly in relation to
soft power and public diplomacy, and is supported by a wide range of sources and
methodologies. The book draws in a range of scholars across these different
fields, and includes esteemed FIFA scholar Professor Alan Tomlinson. Tomlinson
addresses diplomacy within the world’s global game of Association Football,
while other subjects include the rise of mega-sport events as sites of
diplomacy, new consideration of Chinese ping-pong diplomacy prior to the 1970s
and the importance of boycotts in sport – particularly in relation to newly
explored dimensions of the boycotts of the 1980 and 1984 Olympic Games. The
place of non-state actors is explored throughout: be they individual or
institutions they perform a crucial role as conduits of the transactions of
sport and diplomacy. Based on twentieth- and twenty-first-century evidence, the
book acknowledges antecedents from the ancient Olympics to the contemporary era,
and in its conclusions offers avenues for further study based on the future
sport and diplomacy relationship. The book has a strong international basis
because it covers a broad range of countries, their diplomatic relationship with
sport and is written by a truly transnational cast of authors. The intense media
scrutiny of the Olympic Games, FIFA World Cup and other international sports
will also contribute to the global interest in this volume.
This book shows how environmentalists have shaped the world's largest multilateral development lender, investment financier and political risk insurer to take up sustainable development. It challenges an emerging consensus over international organisational change to argue that international organisations (IOs) are influenced by their social structure and may change their practices to reflect previously antithetical norms such as sustainable development. The text locates sources of organisational change with environmentalists, thus demonstrating the ways in which non-state actors can effect change within large intergovernmental organisations through socialisation. It combines an account of international organisational change with detailed empirical evidence of change in one issue area across three institutions.
The tale of transnational advocacy networks (TANs) is typically one of non-state actors reshaping world politics through the power of persuasion and principled ideas. This book is about the unromantic and often uncomfortable realities of transnational advocacy in a strong authoritarian state and rising world power. Drawing together case studies that span a range of issues, repertoires, and results of advocacy, it elaborates the constitutive role of the state in contemporary transnational activism. Because transnational networks are significant globally and domestically, the book speaks to students of comparative and international politics, bridging what is treated here as a superficial divide between the sub-fields. It discusses the campaigns around justice for Falun Gong and the strengthening of intellectual property rights in China. The book then traces the campaign around HIV/AIDS treatment, and the effort to abolish capital punishment in China. In the campaign for Tibetan independence, Chinese intransigence on the matter of national sovereignty for Tibet produced a split within the TAN. The book argues that that TANs can be effective when a legitimacy-seeking state deems the adoption of new policy positions in a given issue area to be critical for the preservation of its own moral authority and power monopoly. The key to working more effectively in China, therefore, is to recognize the source of Chinese Communist Party legitimacy and the connectedness of an issue to it. Those wishing to approach China recognize and take seriously the Chinese power to shape global issues and campaigns in support of them.