An investigative research unraveling the implication of economic sanctions on Burmese women. This research was inspired by allegations in 2003 that thousands of women in Burma/Myanmar lost their jobs in the garment industry, thus exposing women to vulnerable aspects of forced migration and trafficking. A short case study of Iraq, Haiti, and Cuba is additionally provided while the history of economic sanctions and boycotts is heavily scrutinized. Perspectives of humanitarian law, human rights law, and feminist theory frame the basis of the research of which provide another critical dimension into the ongoing debate on economic sanctions.

No description available.

No description available.

Two international treaty frameworks - Amended Protocol II (APII) to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) - have been developed to prohibit or restrict the use of landmines. However, reflecting a gap in current academic research, there is a lack of knowledge of their effectiveness in supporting the humanitarian goals that underpin both treaties. In order to address gaps in the existing literature, this thesis applies an analytical framework grounded in regime theory to develop new insights into the design, implementation and effectiveness of APII and the APMBC within the broader framework of international humanitarian law (IHL). Two main hypotheses are explored. The first considers the importance for regime effectiveness of the relationship between design and implementation processes. The second analyses the significance for the landmine regimes of regime interplay and nesting within wider IHL and mine action discourses. In addressing these hypotheses, design/implementation interplay, agency dynamics and normative considerations represent key themes that enable us to develop new insights to a specific issue area that also demonstrates important linkages to wider humanitarian, security and developmental agendas.

With almost 4 million registered Syrian refugees, the UN has called it the world’s worst refugee crisis. The influx of 628,000 asylum-seekers to neighboring Jordan has tested its strength and protection capabilities. The UNHCR is the organizational spearhead of the international refugee regime, the set of rights and procedural structures upon which signatory States agree to protect refugee rights. This ethnographic research contributes lived experience to the existing quantitative scholarship on the Syrian refugee influx in Jordan. Spending the long days of Ramadan with young adult Syrian national urban refugees, I learned about the gaps between respondents’ hardships in establishing secure lives, and the rights the UNHCR guarantees for them in Amman. This thesis argues that respondents’ experiences reflect the systematic failure of refugee protection due to inherent weaknesses of the refugee regime. Gaps in protections are the logical result of the expanding role of nation-states, as self-interested actors, in making important decisions in the enforcement of refugee rights. I argue that the expanding interest of Northern States’ to limit immigration since September 11th has rendered the UNHCR incapable of providing refugees the levels of protection they are guaranteed. The refugee regime makes certain assumptions of the host country’s carrying capacity, as well as assumptions that other nation-states will willingly open its doors for Syrian refugee resettlement. Since the UNHCR cannot rely upon Northern states committing themselves to third country resettlement, refugees can no longer expect the refugee regime to uphold its mandate that it was founded to ensure.

Depuis 2001, l'UE a mené plus d'une vingtaine d'opérations militaires et de missions civiles, et elle est désormais considérée comme une organisation majeure dans le domaine du maintien de la paix.Longtemps perçue comme une organisation intergouvernementale, la mise en place d'une structure européenne de gestion des crises intégrée au coeur de l'organisation, ainsi que la délégation de la gestion courante de la crise aux organes européens, ont participé à l'autonomisation progressive de l'UE par rapport à ses Etats membres. Cette autonomisation de l'organisation se manifeste également dans l'ordre juridique international. Tout un corps de règles s'applique alors à l'UE du fait de son intervention dans l'ordre juridique international, notamment les règles relatives à la responsabilité internationale des organisations régionales. L'intervention effective de l'Union européenne dans le domaine du maintien de la paix – en tant qu'organisation régionale – s'inscrit dans un cadre juridique imprécis. Or, le phénomène de régionalisation a pu être interprété comme portant préjudice au système de sécurité collective instauré par la Charte des Nations unies. Partant,deux aspects de l'intervention effective de l'UE appellent analyse : celui de la conformité de son action au cadre onusien et celui de sa contribution aux évolutions du maintien de la paix / Since 2001, the EU has conducted more than twenty military operations and civilian missions, and is now seen as one of the leading organizations in the field of peacekeeping. For a long time perceived as an intergovernmental organization, the establishment of an integrated structure for crisis management into the heart of the organization, as well as the delegation of this crisis management to the different European organs, have contributed to the gradual empowerment of the EU toward its member states. This process of becoming autonomous is also evident in the international legal order. A large set of rules thus applies to the EU due to its involvement in the international legal order, including rules relating to the international responsibility for regional organizations. The effective intervention of the European Union in the field of peacekeeping – as a regional organization– is in keeping with an unclear legal framework. However, the phenomen on of regionalization could have been interpreted as prejudicing the collective security system established by the UN Charter.Two aspects of the effective intervention of the European Union call for analysis : the conformity of its action to the UN framework and its contribution to the evolution of peacekeeping

Cette thèse a pour objectif de démontrer que la lutte contre le terrorisme n’exige pas de mesures arbitraires pour se prémunir et/ou éradiquer un tel phénomène globalisé. Deux notions s’affrontent : le maintien de la paix et la sécurité et les droits de l’homme. Sont-elles compatibles ? La lutte contre le terrorisme doit elle être menée à tout prix ? Nous verrons que le contrôle international/régional des mesures prises par les Etats au sein d’une instance internationale ou individuellement est nécessaire et ce en raison de la globalisation du terrorisme qui impacte toutes les nations. Certains droits sont particulièrement menacés par les diverses mesures anti-terroristes, ainsi que les cadres définis des possibilités ou des interdictions de déroger ou de limiter spécifiquement chacun de ces droits. Ce contrôle va être confié à des organes internationaux/régionaux de statuts différents et disposant de moyens de contrôles différents pour contrôler les mesures des Etats. Ce contrôle va permettre de vérifier si les mesures prises par les Etats sont bien conformes au droit international et notamment que ces mesures ne violent pas ni le droit international des droits de l’homme ni le droit humanitaire.Toutefois, ce contrôle international est limité. En effet, les mesures édictées au niveau international sont prises par les Etats victimes du terrorisme et pour lesquelles un contrôle de légalité semble difficile à envisager. Ce contrôle est limité également en raison de l’objectif primordial de lutte contre le terrorisme existant au sein de chaque organe international et régional visant à ne pas freiner l’action des Etats. Nous verrons ainsi que la portée de ce contrôle reste encore nuancée. / The aim of this work is to prove that the fight against terrorism doesn’t need arbitrary measures to eradicate such a globalised phenomena. Two notions are in conflict: peace keeping and human rights. Are they compatible? Should the fight against terrorism be lead by all means?We will see the the international/regional control of the measures taken by the States is necessary because of the globalisation of terrorism. Rights are threatened by measures undertaken by the States. The control is done by international/regional organs which can take different ways. It checks that the States respect international law and especially International Human rights and Humanitarian Law.Nethertheless, this control is limited because the measures adopted at international level are made by States who are victims of terrorism. The international control of legality is far from being accepted. The control is also limited because of the primary aim of the States which is to fight against terrorism. We will see that the scope of the control is nuanced.

The duality of the United States’ relationship with international criminal law and human rights atrocities is a fascinating theme that weaves through all of American history, but most distinctly demonstrates the contradictory nature of American foreign policy in the latter half of the 20th century. America is both protector of human rights and perpetrator of human rights atrocities, global police force and aggressor. The Cold War exacerbated the tensions caused by American military dominance. The international political and physical power of the American military allowed the United States to do as it pleased in the 20th century with few consequences, but that power also brought watchfulness from the global community and an expectation that the United States would intervene when rogue states or leaders committed crimes against humanity. The international legal community has expected the United States to act and illegally intervene in some situations, but to pursue policy changes peacefully through diplomatic channels on other occasions.

Depuis la fin de la Guerre Froide, les conflits armés ont mis en exergue la multiplication d’un pratique, certes ancienne, mais qui a trouvé davantage de vigueur depuis : celle du pillage et de la destruction. Le pillage et la destruction de biens culturels ou des ressources naturelles, notamment, constituent désormais un véritable moteur du conflit. Moteur économique, le pillage des biens culturels ou des ressources naturelles permet de financer des groupes rebelles. Moteur de la guerre, le pillage des ressources naturelles implique le travail forcé de civils. De même, le pillage ou la destruction de biens culturels entre dans un objectif de destruction de l’identité d’un groupe ethnique, et par là-même du groupe en tant que tel. Ainsi, au-delà de la violation du droit international humanitaire, la violation de l’interdiction du pillage et de la destruction impliquent une violation des droits de l’Homme. Ce principe, à la croisée des droits, constitue en réalité l’épine dorsale d’un système juridique. / After the end of the Cold War, armed conflicts have witnessed the multiplication of an ancient practice, in a more vigorous manner: the practice of pillaging and destruction. Henceforth, the pillaging and destruction of cultural goods or natural resources, notably, constitutes the real driving force of a conflict. An economic driving force, as the pillaging of cultural goods or of natural resources embodies a medium to finance rebels. A war driving force, as the pillaging of natural resources implies the forced labour of civilians. Also, the pillaging or the destruction of cultural goods is part of an objective of destruction of the identity of an ethnic group. Farther the violation of humanitarian law, the violation of the prohibition of pillaging and destruction implies the violation of human rights. As a consequence, this prohibition, at the crossroads of laws, constitutes the backbone of a real legal system.

Remarquant la nature transfrontalière des défis politiques et culturels soulevés par la guerre franco-allemande de 1870-1871, cette thèse propose d’interroger l’expérience de la neutralité dans les sociétés de trois États – le Danemark, la Suisse et la Belgique – choisis pour leur complémentarité en matière de stratégie, de géographie, d’institutions et d’organisation constitutionnelle. Documents diplomatiques, archives administratives, journaux, publications contemporaines du conflit, témoignages artistiques, correspondances et carnets privés servent une étude transnationale déclinée en trois principales orientations. La première met en lumière l’environnement technique et technologique dans lequel évoluent les neutres, les sentiments que trahissent leurs témoignages ainsi que leurs efforts pour devenir et rester non-belligérants. La deuxième questionne l’engagement des neutres dans la guerre à travers, notamment, le parcours de philanthropes et de soldats volontaires. La troisième orientation pose enfin une question a priori paradoxale : le neutre est-il un vainqueur ou un vaincu du conflit franco-allemand ? / Noting the cross-border nature of the political and cultural challenges raised by the Franco-German War of 1870-1871, this doctoral thesis proposes to question the experience of neutrality within the societies of three States – Denmark, Switzerland and Belgium – chosen for their complementarity in terms of strategy, geography, institutions and constitutional organisation. Diplomatic documents, administrative archives, newspapers, publications, artistic works, letters and private documentation serve a transnational study divided into three main directions. The first direction reveals the technical and technological environment in which neutrals operate, the feelings betrayed by their testimonies and their efforts to become and remain non-belligerent. The second direction interrogates the involvement of the neutrals during the war through – among others – the trajectories of philanthropists and volunteer soldiers. The third orientation poses a seemingly paradoxical question: is the neutral a victor or a vanquished of the war of 1870-1871 ?