Made available in DSpace on 2017-07-21T18:13:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Higor Brigola.pdf: 1027380 bytes, checksum: bdb5b248e883adc9b1c91868d5fe56ad (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-03-12 / A presente dissertação tem como objetivo traçar as principais diretrizes da nova agenda de segurança nacional brasileira no pós-Guerra Fria, principalmente através dos acordos internacionais na área de segurança celebrados e que se encontram no site do Itamaraty. Busca-se, ao mesmo tempo, analisar comparativamente a posição brasileira quanto aos temas de segurança e a agenda de segurança dos EUA, destacando-se o esforço brasileiro de maior autonomia, especialmente no governo Lula. Não se descarta também a crescente influência da China na América do Sul, o que acaba contrabalanceando o poder dos EUA na região e explica a dificuldade da imposição da agenda de segurança dos estadunidenses como nos moldes da Guerra Fria.

O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar as mudanças institucionais ocorridas no Conselho de Segurança Nacional dos Estados Unidos entre 2001 e 2016. Ele se enquadra nas Resoluções nº 114/2014 e 115/2014 da Câmara de Pós-Graduação da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul e, portanto, é dividido em três partes. A PARTE I é composta por uma contextualização do objeto, contendo uma descrição geral do objetivo do trabalho, bem como a delimitação do objeto, marco teórico, e marco temporal. A PARTE II é comporta pelo artigo em si, que analisa as mudanças no sistema do Conselho de Segurança Nacional dos Estados Unidos através das administrações dos presidentes George W. Bush (2001-2008) e Barack Obama (2008-2016). O objetivo é demonstrar que mudanças em agencias de segurança nacional podem ser pontuais ou incrementais, dependendo das suas causas e consequências. Para tal, foram utilizadas técnicas de analise qualitativa e teoria do equilíbrio pontuado no exame de documentos oficiais e registros públicos. Primeiro, uma matriz institucional formada por normas, organizações, regras, capacidades e incentivos foi usada para comparar as mudanças no Conselho de Segurança Nacional para comparar as mudanças nas duas presidências. Em seguida, possíveis causas de mudanças selecionadas foram identificadas – design original da agencia, interesses dos atores burocráticos, ou eventos externos –, e finalmente, determinamos as consequências que essas mudanças podem ter para instituições ou politicas. A PARTE III apresenta a descrição da agenda de pesquisa a ser seguida. / This paper aims to analyze the institutional changes that took place in the National Security Council of the United States between 2001 and 2016. It is in accordance with Resolutions 114/2014 and 115/2014 of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, and therefore is divided into three parts. PART I is composed of a contextualization of the object, containing a general description of the objective of the work, as well as the delimitation of the object, theoretical framework, and time frame. PART II is composed by the article itself, which analyzes the changes in the system of the United States National Security Council through the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush (2001-2008) and Barack Obama (2008-2016). The objective is to demonstrate that changes in national security agencies can be punctual or incremental, depending on their causes and consequences. In order to do so we used techniques of qualitative analysis and theory of punctuated equilibrium in the examination of official documents and public records. First, an institutional matrix consisting of norms, organizations, rules, capabilities, and incentives was used to compare changes in the National Security Council to compare changes in the two presidencies. Then, possible causes for selected changes have been identified - original agency design, bureaucratic actors’ interests, or external events - and finally we determine the consequences that such changes can have for institutions or policies. PART III presents the description of the research agenda to be followed.

O presente trabalho visa abordar as características do sistema político mexicano que permitiram o passo silencioso de um Estado com traços autoritários para um contrainsurgente. O sistema político mexicano, derivado da Revolução popular iniciada em 1910 e da criação do Partido Revolucionario Institucional(PRI), propiciou uma cultura política que fortaleceu a figura presidencial. Esta extrapolava as atribuições constitucionais e se legitimava tanto na política interna como na externa através do \"nacionalismo revolucionário\". Os governos de Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Luis Echeverría e José López Portillo (1964-1982) estão marcados pela crise hegemônica evidenciada na radicalização das organizações de esquerda. Entre outros motivos, pelo esgotamento do modelo econômico desenvolvimentista, pela crise de representatividade do partido e falta de espaços para a participação política, pela corrupção das instituições e a escalada de violência do Estado contra a oposição. Nesses dezoito anos localizamos uma transformação nas formas de violência institucional pela assimilação da Doutrina de Segurança Nacional e a Doutrina Contrainsurgente dos Estados Unidos da América, por exemplo, na consolidação de grupos paramilitares pagos pelo Estado e treinados em norte-américa. O nacionalismo revolucionário possibilitou então que a submissão à ideologia estadunidense não fosse explícita, gerando dinâmicas repressivas (qualitativamente) similares às vivenciadas nas ditaduras latino-americanas. Ainda que o México tenha sido considerado uma democracia exemplar alheia às guerras sujas e aos golpes de Estado que comoveram o continente na segunda metade do século XX. O objetivo deste trabalho é salientar os elementos contraditórios existentes entre o discurso público, analisado a partir dos informes presidenciais, e o discurso elaborado desde os órgãos de segurança, isto é, os relatórios da Dirección Federal de Seguridad. Nessas contradições podemos ir avaliando as formas de alinhamento às doutrinas de segurança estrangeiras. / The main objective of this Master\'s project is to address the characteristics of the Mexican political system that allowed the silent step from a state with authoritarian traits to a counterinsurgent one. The Mexican political system, derived from the popular revolution that began in 1910 and from the creation of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional, maintained a political culture that strengthened the figure of president. This went beyond the powers permitted by the constitution and legitimized both internal and external policies through \"revolutionary nationalism.\" The governments of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Luis Echeverría, and José López Portillo (1964-1982) are marked by a hegemonic crisis seen in the radicalization of leftist organizations. Other motives for this shift include: the depletion of the developmentalist economic model, the crisis of representation in the party and a lack of spaces for political participation, the corruption of institutions, and the escalation of state violence against the opposition. In these eighteen years, a transformation occurs in the form of institutional violence through the assimilation of the National Security Doctrine of the United States; for example, the consolidation of paramilitary groups paid by the state and trained by northern neighbors. Revolutionary nationalism then allowed the non-explicit submission to American ideology, generating results (qualitatively) similar to those experienced in the repressive dynamics of Latin American dictatorships. Still, Mexico has been considered an exemplary democracy, despite dirty wars and coups that shocked the continent in the second half of the twentieth century.The aim of this study is to highlight the contradictory elements between the public discourse, analyzed from the presidential reports, and the discourse developed from the security organs, in other words, the reports of the Dirección Federal de Seguridad. These contradictions we can to evaluated the alignment of forms to foreign security doctrines.

The aim of the government' s state of emergency in June 1986 was to try and bring the country under control through the use of force. Tens of thousands of people were detained, and many were tilled. At the same time, the government has been building a National Security Management System (NSMS). This is a series of structures throughout South Africa, designed to defend apartheid. The main type of structure is called a Joint Management Centre (JHC). Before we explain what a JMC is and what it does, it is useful to know where the idea for a National Security Management System comes from.

Question majeure de l'ordre public le contrôle du meurtre est pleinement institutionnalisé au Liban. Cependant, l'une des tâches les plus complexes du système judiciaire libanais est de prévenir la vendetta. Ce travail porte sur un lynchage exécuté en réaction à l'homicide de quatre membres d’une même famille advenu le 29 avril 2010, en présence des acteurs du système judiciaire. Ce qui a été connu sous le nom de «la vengeance de Ketermaya » —village situé dans la partie méridionale du gouvernorat du Mont Liban—illustre la dérive de la vendetta coutumière dans la violence de profanation. Anthropologue de la violence extrême Véronique Nahoum- Grappe met l’accent sur la convergence du crime de profanation avec les crimes politiques. Fondée sur une description dense de l'affaire notre recherche interroge les dérégulations des systèmes sociétaux et étatique de contrôle du meurtre. Seraient-elles conséquentes aux politiques de régulation menées selon des priorités liées à la sécurité nationale, priorités qui ne prennent pas en compte d'autres problèmes sociaux importants ? / As a major question of public order, control of murder is fully institutionalized in Lebanon. However, one of the most complicated task facing the Lebanese judiciary system is to prevent vendetta. Based on a thick description of the case this dissertation is about what came to be known as “the vengeance of Ketermaya”’ —a village Southern part of the Mount Lebanon governorate. April 29, 2010, a lynching that happened in reaction to the homicide of four family member, in presence of representative of the judiciary system, illustrate a drift of control of murder into a violence of desecration. According to Veronique Nahoum-Grape, “political crimes” and “crime of desecration” converge. Does the drift into extreme coercive violence illustrate a related disturbance of vendetta and legal systems of control of murder when policies of regulation are meant to be led according to priorities centered on issues of national security that not take into account other significant social issues?

O presente trabalho visa abordar as características do sistema político mexicano que permitiram o passo silencioso de um Estado com traços autoritários para um contrainsurgente. O sistema político mexicano, derivado da Revolução popular iniciada em 1910 e da criação do Partido Revolucionario Institucional(PRI), propiciou uma cultura política que fortaleceu a figura presidencial. Esta extrapolava as atribuições constitucionais e se legitimava tanto na política interna como na externa através do \"nacionalismo revolucionário\". Os governos de Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Luis Echeverría e José López Portillo (1964-1982) estão marcados pela crise hegemônica evidenciada na radicalização das organizações de esquerda. Entre outros motivos, pelo esgotamento do modelo econômico desenvolvimentista, pela crise de representatividade do partido e falta de espaços para a participação política, pela corrupção das instituições e a escalada de violência do Estado contra a oposição. Nesses dezoito anos localizamos uma transformação nas formas de violência institucional pela assimilação da Doutrina de Segurança Nacional e a Doutrina Contrainsurgente dos Estados Unidos da América, por exemplo, na consolidação de grupos paramilitares pagos pelo Estado e treinados em norte-américa. O nacionalismo revolucionário possibilitou então que a submissão à ideologia estadunidense não fosse explícita, gerando dinâmicas repressivas (qualitativamente) similares às vivenciadas nas ditaduras latino-americanas. Ainda que o México tenha sido considerado uma democracia exemplar alheia às guerras sujas e aos golpes de Estado que comoveram o continente na segunda metade do século XX. O objetivo deste trabalho é salientar os elementos contraditórios existentes entre o discurso público, analisado a partir dos informes presidenciais, e o discurso elaborado desde os órgãos de segurança, isto é, os relatórios da Dirección Federal de Seguridad. Nessas contradições podemos ir avaliando as formas de alinhamento às doutrinas de segurança estrangeiras. / The main objective of this Master\'s project is to address the characteristics of the Mexican political system that allowed the silent step from a state with authoritarian traits to a counterinsurgent one. The Mexican political system, derived from the popular revolution that began in 1910 and from the creation of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional, maintained a political culture that strengthened the figure of president. This went beyond the powers permitted by the constitution and legitimized both internal and external policies through \"revolutionary nationalism.\" The governments of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Luis Echeverría, and José López Portillo (1964-1982) are marked by a hegemonic crisis seen in the radicalization of leftist organizations. Other motives for this shift include: the depletion of the developmentalist economic model, the crisis of representation in the party and a lack of spaces for political participation, the corruption of institutions, and the escalation of state violence against the opposition. In these eighteen years, a transformation occurs in the form of institutional violence through the assimilation of the National Security Doctrine of the United States; for example, the consolidation of paramilitary groups paid by the state and trained by northern neighbors. Revolutionary nationalism then allowed the non-explicit submission to American ideology, generating results (qualitatively) similar to those experienced in the repressive dynamics of Latin American dictatorships. Still, Mexico has been considered an exemplary democracy, despite dirty wars and coups that shocked the continent in the second half of the twentieth century.The aim of this study is to highlight the contradictory elements between the public discourse, analyzed from the presidential reports, and the discourse developed from the security organs, in other words, the reports of the Dirección Federal de Seguridad. These contradictions we can to evaluated the alignment of forms to foreign security doctrines.

Magister Legum - LLM / This paper aimed at analysing what was South Africa's response to its international obligations regarding the 9/11 events and how does such response comply with the country's constitutional framework. This study gave a brief outline of the most significant legislative changes in a number of countries and then concentrate on the South African anti-terrorism legislation. It identified the provisions of the Act that have been discussed most controversial throughout the drafting process and analysed whether they comply with constitutional standards. Particular emphasis was laid on the possible differences between the South African Act and comparative legislation that derive directly from the apartheid history of the country. / South Africa

Le droit joue un rôle majeur dans l’élaboration d’une nouvelle politique de l’Union européenne : la sécurité intérieure. Il lui confère toute sa substance, mais surtout il est, au regard du principe de légalité, la condition et la limite de l’édification de cette politique intervenant dans un domaine sensible pour les États. En retour, le droit subit des fluctuations, conséquences des rapports interinstitutionnels. L’opérationnalité, comme forme de normativité spécifique, est une caractéristique essentielle de cette politique de nature très étatique. Intimement liée au succès de la nouvelle gouvernance dans la construction européenne, elle est la manifestation de nouvelles formes de régulations atypiques qui tendent à pénétrer le droit européen. La méthode communautaire ne disparaît pas pour autant, mais elle est repensée, tout comme le droit de l’Union dit « classique ». Sa rationalité change au fil de son évolution en direction d’un « droit néo-moderne » (C.-A. De Morand). / Law plays a major role in the development of a new policy of the European Union, named the internal security policy. It gives it all its substance, but, in the light of the legality principle, it is the condition and the limit to building this policy in a sensitive area for States. In return, law undergoes fluctuations, consequences of the interinstitutional relations. The operationality, as a form of « light » normativity, is an essential characteristic of this very nature of this state policy. Intimately linked to the success of the new governance in the European construction, the operationality is the manifestation of new forms of atypical regulations that tend to penetrate the European law. The Community method does not disappear, but it is redesigned, as well as the EU « classical » law. Rationality changes throughout its evolution towards a « neo-modern right » (C.-A. De Morand).

The deep-rooted Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been a major source of destabilization in the Middle East for some three-quarters of a century. Whereas other long-standing conflicts around the world have been brought to a close, this struggle (both in and of itself and within its wider Arab-Israeli dimension) remains a perennial tinderbox. This is particularly true given the unsettling realities of the region in which the conflict exists. Consequently, a certain sense of urgency for finding a permanent political settlement can be discerned both within the region and outside it. still, the search for a solution has yielded progress only on an interim arrangement (the Gaza-Jericho autonomy accord signed by Israel and the PLO September 13, 1993). To be workable, a political settlement must break new ground by conceptualizing the problem in terms which transcend the traditional, emotion-laden and myopic rhetoric commonly used by both sides. This research is an attempt to contribute to a fresh, far-reaching understanding of the requisites for a secure Israeli-Palestinian peace and, on this basis, to evaluate the alternative scenarios for the ultimate disposition of the Israeli-administered West Bank and Gaza Strip. To that end, the fundamental question is which of these alternatives would go furthest in satisfying the vital interests of both parties so that a permanent settlement of the disputed territories might at last be implemented. In developing a conceptual framework for evaluating potential solutions, this research incorporates a comprehensive definition of "national security" juxtaposed with a concept related to American-Soviet detente: common security. National security means protection against all major perils to a state's security, not merely military threats. Common security is a mutual commitment to joint survival. It is based on a recognition that because of an increasingly interdependent world, states can no longer achieve security unilaterally but rather only through the creation of positive-sum processes that lead to cooperation with one another. The first half of this thesis, then, attempts to establish the essential elements of a common security framework for Israel and the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. The concluding chapters of the thesis focus on the evaluation of five alternative scenarios for an IsraeliPalestinian political settlement: 1) the present status quo: 2) the "Jordanian option," or a return to the status quo ante of June 1967; 3) Israeli annexation; 4) an IsraelJordan confederation with a Palestinian entity federally linked to one or both; and 5) a Palestinian state, either fully independent or federally connected with Israel and/or Jordan. Each option is assessed on the basis of the degree to which it would satisfy the common-security criteria formulated in the preceding chapters: 1) protection against military threats: 2) the realization of Palestinian political self-determination; 3) the preservation of Israel's Jewish and democratic ideals; 4) internal (societal) and regional stability; 5) economic viability; and 6) the sufficient and equitable allocation of water resources. The alternative rated most favorably is the establishment of a sovereign, independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, excluding the Jordan Valley and the Jerusalem Corridor. This assessment presupposes certain provisions. Among these are the deployment of an American-led multinational peacekeeping force in the Samarian mountains of the West Bank, the creation of an economic confederation and tripartite federal water authority linking Israel, Jordan and Arab Palestine, and a special status for East Jerusalem. The implementation of such a settlement, it is argued, would create a new modus vivendi among the Arabs and the Israelis, which, in turn, could serve as the underpinning of a durable and comprehensive peace.

Many researchers and political experts have commented on the disenfranchisement of the citizenry caused by irresponsible use of power by the government that potentially violates the 4th Amendment rights of millions of people through secret mass surveillance programs. Disclosures of this abuse of power are presumably protected by the 1st Amendment, though when constitutional protections are not followed by the government, the result can be prosecution and imprisonment of whistleblowers. Using a critical autoethnographic approach, the purpose of this study was to examine the devolution of democratic governance and constitutional rights in the United States since 9/11. Using the phenomena of my signature indictment (the first whistleblower since Daniel Ellsberg was charged under the Espionage Act) and prosecution by the U.S. government, data were collected through interviews with experts associated with this unique circumstance. These data, including my own recollections of the event, were inductively coded and subjected to a thematic analysis procedure. The findings revealed that the use of national security as the primary grounds to suppress democracy and the voices of whistleblowers speaking truth to, and about, power increased authoritarian tendencies in government. These tendencies gave rise to extra-legal autocratic behavior and sovereign state control over the institutions of democratic governance. Positive social change can only take place in a society that has robust governance and social structures that strengthen democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and do not inhibit or suppress them.