The purpose of this thesis is to explore the ways in which Japan can contribute to UN peace operations. In particular, it looks into the political history of Japan as well as its foreign policies in order to understand how Japan's contributions were implemented and why they are characteristically distinct from other countries. During the 1990s, Japan encountered heavy criticism for the way it responded to the Gulf War crisis. This prompted many discussions on the willingness and ability of Japan to contribute to the resolution of international crises. The main criticism was its unwillingness to send personnel to locations in need and instead, only offered financial assistance. The reasons for Japan's behaviour were deeply rooted in the interpretation of its constitution which was established right after the end of World War II. Despite the constraints on Japan's initial offer, the way Japan was subsequently able to contribute was highly effective. This started a new way in which to take part in peace related activities that was distinct from the traditional approaches to peace operations. In order to substantiate this argument, this thesis will look at analyses Japan's involvement in the UN missions in Cambodia and East Timor and draws on this analysis of those operations in order to identify future opportunities.

The thesis argues that feminist approaches to international law provide relevant and necessary methods for understanding the limitations of the international law on the use of force. The primary argument is that justifications for violence made under international law replicate, at a conceptual level, the construction of justifications for interpersonal violence within Western legal systems. Consequently, feminist legal theories that expose the sexed and gendered limitations of interpersonal justifications help demonstrate the sexed and gendered contours of international justifications for the use of force. In adopting a structural feminism methodology, the thesis examines the legal reasoning developed by states to justify the use of force. In particular, the thesis offers critical insight into five types of situations where force may be deployed: Security Council authorised force, Article 51 self-defence, self-determination, humanitarian intervention and justifications for the use of force under the 'War on Terror'. Recommendations for action are developed through the use of a law as narrative technique that situates legal accounts within (as opposed to above or separate to) other social and cultural discourses. This includes the use of women's narratives of violence that link the violence experienced by women in the private sphere of with the public violence of states and militaries. I also demonstrate how the domestic analogy can be utilised to develop contours for reform through an analysis of feminist accounts of the limitations of mandatory interventions into domestic (intimate partner) violence. The thesis contributes to the literature on the international law on the use of force with a detailed feminist response to justifications for the use of force, as well as through strategies for reform that return to the foundational aspects of the international legal regime, including the collective security structure. To this end the thesis argues Arendt's political model of natality offers the type of foundation that future feminist and mainstream accounts must engage with to shift beyond the persistent dilemmas evidenced through the domestic analogy and the law as narrative techniques.

Arbitration has long been the preferred method of resolving commercial disputes as, at its best, it is both cheaper and quicker than litigation. But by the 1980s many international commercial arbitration cases were proving so slow and expensive that its advantages were being questioned. At this time several approaches were tried to make arbitration faster and cheaper. ‘Fasttrack arbitration’ was one of these new approaches. In the last 25 years fasttrack arbitration has become “institutionalized”, as an increasing number of institutions have enacted specific sets of expedited rules. Despite this trend, there is still uncertainty over whether fast-track procedures can become a viable alternative to conventional international arbitration. With more than 25 years of practical application of FTA to look at, it is time to ask the question which forms the title of this thesis: Is there a scope for the wider application of fast-track arbitrations in the resolution of international commercial disputes? In order to find an answer, this thesis looks at the development of regular arbitration and why it changed from a swift and economic method of solving disputes into the cumbersome and unpopular method of the 1980s. We will then consider the various attempts that were made to improve the situation, culminating in the development of international fast-track commercial arbitration (IFTCA) that we see today. Having examined the defining features of IFTCA, the thesis will be in a position to weigh the evidence on whether there is a scope for the wider application of fast-track procedures.

International commercial arbitration is recognised as the most widely accepted form of dispute resolution in international trade in both the Middle East and the West. But in the Middle East divergent, competing rationalities are constantly close to the surface and repeatedly collide in arbitration cases of international commercial disputes. The Islamic Middle East focus is on maintaining tradition and safeguarding relationships, features that both stand at the heart of the dispute resolution culture of the region. By contrast, in the West, international commercial arbitration is adversarial and individualistic, following the neo-classical model of law. In recent times when the western model has been superimposed on this deeply entrenched dispute resolution culture, hostility and dissatisfaction have resulted. In addition, instances of perceived or actual Western ignorance and bias against Shari'ah have led to even more resentment on the part of the Arab players. Both Islamic law and tribal customs impose a duty of reconciliation on any intervener in a dispute. This third party must attempt to help the disputing parties reach a settlement that is just and fair. This clash of cultures is explored in detail in this thesis which uses Jordan as the case study. Jordan has a rich and embedded tribal history and traditions, which remain very much a part of contemporary society. The tribes of Jordan are critical stakeholders of the state and their customs are presented as key pillars of the identity of a Jordanian. Reconciliation is a positive feature of Middle Eastern dispute resolution dimensions of which this thesis suggests could be incorporated in the international commercial arbitration model, making it more representative of, and responsive to, a wider variety of cultural traditions.

Jurisdiction is the “speaking of the law,” the performative and enunciatory mode of normativity. As the expressive register of the law, jurisdiction names practices for declaring, showing and determining the limits and possibilities of legality. Read in these terms, jurisdiction poses centrally important questions to law and jurisprudence but, as a principle in its own right, it has received little attention. Contributing to a small but growing critical literature on jurisdiction this thesis contends that jurisdiction has a unique character that deserves careful theorising. Taking the common law tradition as its primary site of engagement, the thesis argues that jurisdiction has a dual aspect, functioning to both offer a ground for positive or formal law and reflect an extant set of informal practices. In this sense, jurisdiction operates as a third term for the law, mediating between two lawful registers: the positive law and a “law of originary sociability.” I argue that, though attempting to fix and determine this relation, jurisdiction is marked by ambivalence and instability. This indeterminacy, however, is often overlooked; jurisdiction is presented as if it were simply a matter of sovereign force or fiat. Rather than conceive jurisdiction as an expression of the law’s sovereign authority, the thesis argues that jurisdiction is a privileged point at which we can see the law’s fragility. Jurisdiction, then, is a legal technique open to critical intervention and interruption. Such strategies of intervention, that seek to occupy jurisdiction’s function but articulate it otherwise, I name “juriswriting.” My approach to jurisdiction is developed through the philosophy of Jacques Derrida and Jean-Luc Nancy. Both thinkers understand law to have two distinct, but related, senses. On the one hand, there is the law as positive, determinative and violent, on the other hand, law is presented as inoperative and indeterminative, connected either to the law of différance or an ontological assertion of our “being-with” (Mitsein). Both Derrida and Nancy reserve a place for “law” that exceeds the positive law and is, in fact, bound to it in a paradoxical double bind, both providing its conditions of possibility and denying its full efficacy. This characterisation of a doubled aspect to law provides the theoretical frame for my understanding of jurisdiction and is traced through my engagements with Kafka; the sixteenth century constructions of the common law; jurisdiction’s performative and declaratory mode; as well as jurisdiction’s role in bringing political community into relation with the law. The engagement with Derrida and Nancy not only provides the theoretical orientation for this study of jurisdiction but represents a second strand to the argument pursued in the thesis. Moving away from the Levinasian inspired understanding of deconstruction and the law of the 1990s, the thesis seeks to offer a more holistic reading of Derrida’s work, drawing on both his later texts with a specifically juridico-political bent, as well as the earlier interventions on writing and speech act theory. Nancy – particularly his ontology of “being-with” and his work on community – provides a useful supplement to Derrida’s thinking. As the ethical readings of deconstruction in the 1990s turned to Levinas, I turn to Nancy in order to foreground a political current within Derrida’s work. Reading Derrida with Nancy allows me to develop a sense of the political possibilities at stake in reimagining jurisdictional practices and techniques, particularly important for my understanding of juriswriting.

Candidate's Name: Andreu Sola i Martin Title: The United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara Sub-title: A Case Study of MINURSO, including a Re-Evaluation of the Relationship between Peacekeeping and Conflict Resolution Key Words: Conflict Resolution, United Nations, Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding, Western Sahara, Foucault This research project is the first comprehensive study on the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. Its aim is, not only to fill a gap in the literature on peacekeeping, but also to explore the implications and links between the mechanisms put in place by MINURSO in relation to conflict resolution. This thesis contains two parts. The first part examines MINURSO by applying a conventional pattern of analysis. This analysis is structured around three main tasks which are undertaken by the International Community in response to conflict: peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding. MINURSO is also evaluated in light of the conclusions of the Brahimi panel related to reforms to UN Peacekeeping Operations. The second part of the MINURSO case study examines the operative analytical potential of new theoretical grounds in peacekeeping research. In particular, this research explores the possibilities of using a Foucualtian analysis to look at the links between peacekeeping, Western policies of conflict containment and the parties' (Morocco and POLIS ARlO Front) production of powerlknowledge. To sum up, this research project draws conclusions with a view to enhancing conflict resolution capabilities in peacekeeping practice.

The study attempts to provide a comprehensive analysis of the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It considers the contributions of the ICJ towards the UN system and concludes that, although the ICJ's contribution has been significant, many practical and theoretical issues regarding its role remain unsettled. The study proceeds as follows. The first chapter sets out the history of international adjudication and the relationship between international adjudicatory mechanisms and political international organisations. It also includes a review of the legal basis and extent of the relationship between the ICJ and the UN. The second and third chapters aim to throw light upon the advisory role of the ICJ and the manner in which the Court, through this jurisdiction, plays a role in interpreting and developing the institutional law of the UN. The fourth chapter addresses the Court's role in facilitating the realisation of the purposes and principles of the UN through its contentious jurisdiction. This chapter discusses the basis of the contentious jurisdiction of the Court, then examines the practice of the Court in achieving these purposes and principles. The fifth chapter examines the role of the ICJ as a "constitutional court" in the UN framework and its competence to review the legality of acts of the UN organs. The sixth chapter evaluates the Court's role as a court of appeal in respect of the judgments of administrative tribunals established within the framework of the UN and its specialised agencies, particularly in the light of General Assembly Resolution 50/54 (1995). By way of conclusion, the Court's role within the UN system is evaluated and a number of recommendations are made with a view to enhancing the role of the Court to enable it to address new challenges.

Many critical issues in today's international commercial arbitration are unsettled. The purpose of this research is to study how the New York Convention shall be reformed or evolved on a jurisprudential basis. The New York Convention to a certain extent is a legal discourse with some crucial norms such as party autonomy and the split of powers (involving judicial review and sovereignty). Social, historical, economic and cultural factors affect the formation and application of norms in this discourse. With this in mind, the disciplines of law, sociology, and economics will be adopted occasionally. Darwinian legal theory and game theory are two major analytic approaches. There are six chapters in this dissertation. The purpose, task and methodologies of this research are outlined in Chapter 1. No research on arbitration would be complete without some discussion of the historical context, which can help to explore the differences between different times and show the evolution of critical norms and theories. The discussion concerning Darwinian legal theory and the evolution of the New York Convention is in Chapter 2. The theory can be a tool to explain the future development of the New York Convention in a changing legal environment. Game theory is often used to study such legal phenomena as jurisdictional competition and legal harmonisation. The basic idea is that states act in their self-interest like private parties in the game, which requires a "federalism" system in place to harmonise self-interest-oriented national rules. Under the New York Convention, the enforcement of vacated arbitral awards involve multiple states and naturally touches upon the actions these states may take. Game theory is used in Chapter 3 to study the possibility of harmonising national rules in the trend of de-localisation and globalisation. The modern arbitration has become more legalistic. The business community desire applicable rules and procedures more business-oriented and simpler than those used by national courts. Instead of rigid national laws, the business community prefers the stability and predictability offered by law merchant or lex mercatoria. Historical and neo-economic studies of lex mercatoria are offered in Chapter 4 to demonstrate the necessity of recognising lex mercatoria in practice. Public policy is a critical concept in the New York Convention. Apart from the arbitrability and public policy review in the enforcement procedure, Chapter 5 tries to explore the possibility of framing "normative" public policy on the basis of game theory. States are the key actor in implementing public policy. Thus, the role and function of the states in the era of globalisation will be studied as well by reference to the neo-economic theories. A conclusion is set out in Chapter 6.

This thesis examines the responsibility to protect (R2P) doctrine in light of the 2011 Libyan and Syrian conflicts in order to determine host and third-State obligations in the prevention of and the reaction to mass atrocity crimes. This thesis emphasises that R2P is premised in many ways upon existing international norms which it seeks to pull together, repackage, and build upon in order to arrive at a central legal framework for tackling mass atrocity crimes. As such, this thesis discusses R2P’s application in the Libyan and Syrian conflicts in light of both existing international norms as well as an emerging central R2P framework. In terms of host State obligations, a detailed examination of R2P’s role within the Libyan and Syrian conflicts affirms that States universally accepted a binding obligation to protect their own populations from mass atrocity crimes. However, there is no indication – through the various military and non-military measures employed by the international community in response to these conflicts – that States accepted an obligation to react to mass atrocity crimes as part of R2P. Combined with persisting structural limitations within the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), most particularly the permanent members’ right to the veto, it can be seen that R2P has failed to overcome some of the very deficiencies which it was created to address. Moving forward, R2P must either come to impose an obligation upon third-party States to react to mass atrocity situations (and by default, limit the use of the permanent veto), or must identify means by which the international community can circumvent the UNSC when the body is paralysed. This thesis highlights that legal frameworks do exist in support of both of these aims, although they must be further developed and strengthened in order to enhance the enforcement of R2P.

This thesis provides a critique on the law of self-defence in England and Wales. It demonstrates the general justifiability of the defence, while challenging recent legislative amendments that expand its scope for householders. Location has developed as a key variable in cases of self-defence, with greater rights of protection ascribed to householders defending against intruders than is permitted in other situations. The reasons behind this increased protection are criticised, and it is argued that it is more appropriate to apply the same standard of self-defence regardless of the location of the attack. The research also explores the complex relationship existing between the criminal law defence of self-defence and crimes involving offensive weapons in the law of England and Wales. It demonstrates that the law has developed in a contradictory and confusing manner. While self-defence may provide a defence to the infliction of injury to an aggressor, it is unlikely to justify the initial criminal act of carrying an offensive weapon or bladed article in a public place. The reasons for carrying weapons are examined, and it is submitted that in addition to legal attempts to deter and punish possession, proactive initiatives targeted at the community level are required. This is a matter of balancing competing harms, namely, harms to the individual against a risk of harm to society. It is argued that the law has developed appropriate methods for addressing the harms involved in self-defence through application of the reasonable force test. The thesis also highlights the role of the media in shaping public perception of the defence and offences discussed. It also demonstrates the relevance of emotions, primarily fear, and argues for an increased consideration of the power of fear to influence an individual’s defensive force, and decision to carry a weapon for protection where appropriate.