The essay discusses judicial jurisdiction over workplace injury claims against a state in the former Soviet Union Countries. Claiming that such cases should be dismissed in foreign jurisdiction, the paper seeks explanation to different approach and different outcomes of workplace injury cases in the courts of the same countries. The essay begins with background information on particularities of unusual workplace injury cases which emerged in connection with important political event - collapse of the USSR. Relevant provisions of domestic and . international law on judicial jurisdiction, their interpretation and application in Commonwealth of Independent States are discussed in this paper. Analyzing provisions and reasons of different decisions, the essay infers the implications from analysis in support of its main claim.

This paper surveys the legal implications of religious doctrines at they relate to the universal acceptance of reproductive rights. While the use of human rights to advance reproductive health has gained momentum over the last several decades, the variance in arranging religion and state relations and the significant impact religious institutions have over the substantive rights to reproductive freedom in many parts of the world necessitates a break from considering reproductive rights as a strictly secular issue. Using Israel, Poland and Indonesia as examples, this paper will explain how an understanding of the doctrines underlying major world religions is a crucial step towards recognizing how reproductive rights and freedoms can be advanced in a world where laws and policies are informed by both the sacred and the secular.

The essay discusses judicial jurisdiction over workplace injury claims against a state in the former Soviet Union Countries. Claiming that such cases should be dismissed in foreign jurisdiction, the paper seeks explanation to different approach and different outcomes of workplace injury cases in the courts of the same countries. The essay begins with background information on particularities of unusual workplace injury cases which emerged in connection with important political event - collapse of the USSR. Relevant provisions of domestic and . international law on judicial jurisdiction, their interpretation and application in Commonwealth of Independent States are discussed in this paper. Analyzing provisions and reasons of different decisions, the essay infers the implications from analysis in support of its main claim.

This paper surveys the legal implications of religious doctrines at they relate to the universal acceptance of reproductive rights. While the use of human rights to advance reproductive health has gained momentum over the last several decades, the variance in arranging religion and state relations and the significant impact religious institutions have over the substantive rights to reproductive freedom in many parts of the world necessitates a break from considering reproductive rights as a strictly secular issue. Using Israel, Poland and Indonesia as examples, this paper will explain how an understanding of the doctrines underlying major world religions is a crucial step towards recognizing how reproductive rights and freedoms can be advanced in a world where laws and policies are informed by both the sacred and the secular.

This project illuminates Thucydides’ political thought through a novel interpretation of the first book of the History of the Peloponnesian War. It explores how Thucydides reveals the human causes of war through the outbreak of a particular war, the Peloponnesian war. The primary claim is that Thucydides intends the breakdown of the Thirty Years’ Peace between Athens and the Peloponnesians, which inaugurates the great Peloponnesian war, to be understood by grasping how the characters of the Athenian and Spartan regimes contribute to the outbreak of the war and, crucially, how Athens and Sparta differently express human nature. In broad outline, the History’s first book reveals how the regime characters of Athens and Sparta inform their respective foreign policies, but also how the interaction between the two cities—informed by the distinctive necessities pressing upon them—causes the Hellenic status quo to tremble and fall. Throughout the first book, while never obscuring the specific events triggering war, Thucydides progressively develops and expands his original statement that it was Spartan fear of Athenian power that compelled the fighting. The study argues that necessity (or compulsion) is the bright thread that Thucydides uses to guide his reader through the episodes of the first book, from the immediate causes of the Peloponnesian war to the human causes of war, from the particular events to the History’s universal themes.

This project illuminates Thucydides’ political thought through a novel interpretation of the first book of the History of the Peloponnesian War. It explores how Thucydides reveals the human causes of war through the outbreak of a particular war, the Peloponnesian war. The primary claim is that Thucydides intends the breakdown of the Thirty Years’ Peace between Athens and the Peloponnesians, which inaugurates the great Peloponnesian war, to be understood by grasping how the characters of the Athenian and Spartan regimes contribute to the outbreak of the war and, crucially, how Athens and Sparta differently express human nature. In broad outline, the History’s first book reveals how the regime characters of Athens and Sparta inform their respective foreign policies, but also how the interaction between the two cities—informed by the distinctive necessities pressing upon them—causes the Hellenic status quo to tremble and fall. Throughout the first book, while never obscuring the specific events triggering war, Thucydides progressively develops and expands his original statement that it was Spartan fear of Athenian power that compelled the fighting. The study argues that necessity (or compulsion) is the bright thread that Thucydides uses to guide his reader through the episodes of the first book, from the immediate causes of the Peloponnesian war to the human causes of war, from the particular events to the History’s universal themes.

Drawing on insights from social psychological literature on identity formation, and on social movement and contentious politics literature, this research focuses on elite strategies to gain from or survive a crisis. The research specifically looks at strategies to foster popular support and mobilisation. It explores the use of divisive and ethno-centric discourses and policies aimed at mobilising supporters in times of instability or crisis. More specifically, it studies why some elite mobilising appeals have traction. To do so, the research examines social and psychological mechanisms behind group solidarity. A heightened sense of group solidarity is what leads individuals to think in terms of the group, a necessary step for mobilisation. From there, they can be made to feel appeals for collective action are warranted. Three mechanisms in particular are discussed: opposition, politicisation and simplification. Opposing entails enhancing feelings of attachment by creating a sense of antagonistic relations with another group. Politicising consists in ascribing to group identities a political nature, more conducive to contentious relations. The final strategy is simplification. It amounts to simplifying interpretations of the situation and environment so as to make them more readily internalisable. This framework is applied to contemporary Rwanda and to the lead-up to the wars in Yugoslavia. In the Rwandese case, cultural and historical references were repeatedly used by ruling regimes to foster a Hutu uprising against the Tutsi population. This tactic eventually played a fundamental role in triggering the 1994 genocide. In the former Yugoslavia, Croatian and Serbian elites antagonised group relations by agitating nationalist rhetoric. Though this was a strategy to stay in power or gain support, it also led to the break-up of Yugoslavia and to wars in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Drawing on insights from social psychological literature on identity formation, and on social movement and contentious politics literature, this research focuses on elite strategies to gain from or survive a crisis. The research specifically looks at strategies to foster popular support and mobilisation. It explores the use of divisive and ethno-centric discourses and policies aimed at mobilising supporters in times of instability or crisis. More specifically, it studies why some elite mobilising appeals have traction. To do so, the research examines social and psychological mechanisms behind group solidarity. A heightened sense of group solidarity is what leads individuals to think in terms of the group, a necessary step for mobilisation. From there, they can be made to feel appeals for collective action are warranted. Three mechanisms in particular are discussed: opposition, politicisation and simplification. Opposing entails enhancing feelings of attachment by creating a sense of antagonistic relations with another group. Politicising consists in ascribing to group identities a political nature, more conducive to contentious relations. The final strategy is simplification. It amounts to simplifying interpretations of the situation and environment so as to make them more readily internalisable. This framework is applied to contemporary Rwanda and to the lead-up to the wars in Yugoslavia. In the Rwandese case, cultural and historical references were repeatedly used by ruling regimes to foster a Hutu uprising against the Tutsi population. This tactic eventually played a fundamental role in triggering the 1994 genocide. In the former Yugoslavia, Croatian and Serbian elites antagonised group relations by agitating nationalist rhetoric. Though this was a strategy to stay in power or gain support, it also led to the break-up of Yugoslavia and to wars in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

The dissertation examines one of the most remarkable and controversial developments in the recent history of European integration, namely the institutionalization of a regional policy regime to manage the continent’s frontiers. By adopting this regime (known in policy circles as ‘Schengen’), European governments have in fact relinquished part of their sovereign authority over the politically sensitive issue of border control, thereby challenging what for a long time was the dominant national approach to policy-making in this domain. In order to account for the regime’s emergence and success, a constructivist analytical framework centred on the notion of ‘cultures of border control’ is advanced. From this perspective, the adoption of a regional approach to govern Europe’s frontiers is the result of the evolution of a nationalist (‘Westphalian’) culture—or set of background assumptions and related practices about borders shared by a given policy community—into a post-nationalist one (‘Schengen’). The cultural evolutionary argument elaborated in the dissertation captures the unique political dynamics that have characterized border control in Europe in the last two decades and offers a more nuanced account of recent developments than those available in the existing European Studies literature. It can also shed light on current trends defining European politics beyond border control (e.g., Europe’s policy towards its neighbours) and on other attempts to regionalize border control outside Europe (e.g., the proposal for a North American security perimeter).

How do security communities develop in and through practice? For more than forty years, security relations between Russia and NATO member states were structured by the spectre of mutual assured destruction as symbolized by thousands of nuclear missiles targeted at each other. Less than a generation after the end of the Cold War, the possibility of military confrontation between these former enemies has considerably receded. Taking inspiration from Pierre Bourdieu, this dissertation develops a theory of practice of security communities that argues that on the ground of international politics, the social fact of peace emerges when security practitioners come to debate with diplomacy—the non-violent settlement of disputes—instead of about diplomacy. It is doxa, a relationship of immediate adherence to the order of things, that makes such a peaceful practical sense possible. In the empirical analysis, the dissertation reveals an intriguing paradox in the post-Cold War Russian-Atlantic relationship. On the one hand, over the last fifteen years Russia and NATO member states have solved each and every one of their disputes, including fierce ones over the double enlargement, by nonviolent means. Such a track record of peaceful change is testimony to security-communitybuilding processes. But on the other hand, diplomatic success was often bought at the price of a growing mistrust on the Russian side. As the Russian Great Power habitus resurfaced, hysteresis—a disconnect between players’ dispositions and their positions in the game—steadily increased to the point of inconclusive symbolic power struggles over the rules of the international security game and the roles that each player should play. A decade and a half after the end of the Cold War, Russian-Atlantic relations have left the terrain of military confrontation but have yet to settle on that of mature peace. Building on several dozen interviews with Russian and NATO security practitioners, the dissertation discovers that diplomacy has become a normal though not a self-evident practice in Russian-Atlantic dealings.