University of Macau / Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities / Department of Government and Public Administration

Zugl.: Konstanz, Univ., Diss., 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.

No abstract available. / Thesis (M.Soc.Sci.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2012.

This dissertation concerns a crucial episode in the international legal history of nation-building: the Greek-Turkish population exchange. Supported by Athens and Ankara, and implemented largely by the League of Nations, the population exchange showcased the new pragmatism of the post-1919 order, an increased willingness to adapt legal doctrine to local conditions. It also exemplified a new mode of non-military nation-building, one initially designed for sovereign but politico-economically weak states on the semi-periphery of the international legal order. The chief aim here, I argue, was not to organize plebiscites, channel self-determination claims, or install protective mechanisms for vulnerable minorities – all familiar features of the Allied Powers’ management of imperial disintegration in central and eastern Europe after the First World War. Nor was the objective to restructure a given economy and society from top to bottom, generating an entirely new legal order in the process; this had often been the case with colonialism in Asia and Africa, and would characterize much of the mandates system throughout the interwar years. Instead, the goal was to deploy a unique mechanism – not entirely in conformity with European practice, but also distinct from non-European governance regimes – to reshape the demographic composition of Greece and Turkey. I substantiate this argument by marshalling a range of material from international law, legal history, and historical sociology. I first examine minority protection’s development into an instrument of intra-European nation-building during the long nineteenth century, showing how population exchange emerged in the Near East in the 1910s as a radical alternative to minority protection. I then provide a close reading of the travaux préparatoires of the 1922-3 Conference of Lausanne, at which a peace settlement formalizing the exchange was concluded. Finally, I analyze the Permanent Court of International Justice’s 1925 opinion in Exchange of Greek and Turkish Populations, examining it from the standpoint of wide-ranging disputes concerning the place of religion and ethnicity in the exchange process. My aim throughout is to show that the Greek-Turkish exchange laid the groundwork for a mechanism of legal nation-building which would later come to be deployed in a variety of different contexts but whose precise status under international law would remain contested.

This dissertation concerns a crucial episode in the international legal history of nation-building: the Greek-Turkish population exchange. Supported by Athens and Ankara, and implemented largely by the League of Nations, the population exchange showcased the new pragmatism of the post-1919 order, an increased willingness to adapt legal doctrine to local conditions. It also exemplified a new mode of non-military nation-building, one initially designed for sovereign but politico-economically weak states on the semi-periphery of the international legal order. The chief aim here, I argue, was not to organize plebiscites, channel self-determination claims, or install protective mechanisms for vulnerable minorities – all familiar features of the Allied Powers’ management of imperial disintegration in central and eastern Europe after the First World War. Nor was the objective to restructure a given economy and society from top to bottom, generating an entirely new legal order in the process; this had often been the case with colonialism in Asia and Africa, and would characterize much of the mandates system throughout the interwar years. Instead, the goal was to deploy a unique mechanism – not entirely in conformity with European practice, but also distinct from non-European governance regimes – to reshape the demographic composition of Greece and Turkey. I substantiate this argument by marshalling a range of material from international law, legal history, and historical sociology. I first examine minority protection’s development into an instrument of intra-European nation-building during the long nineteenth century, showing how population exchange emerged in the Near East in the 1910s as a radical alternative to minority protection. I then provide a close reading of the travaux préparatoires of the 1922-3 Conference of Lausanne, at which a peace settlement formalizing the exchange was concluded. Finally, I analyze the Permanent Court of International Justice’s 1925 opinion in Exchange of Greek and Turkish Populations, examining it from the standpoint of wide-ranging disputes concerning the place of religion and ethnicity in the exchange process. My aim throughout is to show that the Greek-Turkish exchange laid the groundwork for a mechanism of legal nation-building which would later come to be deployed in a variety of different contexts but whose precise status under international law would remain contested.

Thesis (D.Phil.)--University of Oxford, 2009. / Supervisor: Professor Andrew Hurrell. Bibliography: p. 339-396.

A decisão política e moral entre fazer algo e não fazer nada diante de emergências humanitárias, como genocídio, assassinatos em massa e limpeza étnica ao redor do mundo, permanece como um dos principais dilemas decisórios das relações internacionais e como tema controverso tanto para a Teoria Política quanto para a Teoria de Relações Internacionais. A complexidade e controvérsia deste fenômeno serão analisadas a partir da perspectiva de que as intervenções humanitárias reivindicam o lugar negligenciado das considerações morais tanto pela prática política quanto pelas reflexões teóricas de mainstream das relações internacionais. Desse modo, o principal objetivo desta pesquisa é a análise das intervenções humanitárias a partir da relação entre ordem e justiça sob a perspectiva normativa. É da reflexão sobre a conexão e a combinação dessas duas idéias tão cruciais ao entendimento prático e teórico das relações internacionais que se pretende buscar novas interpretações normativas a respeito desse fenômeno. Para tanto, a reflexão teórica e normativa das intervenções humanitárias será ilustrada com exemplos empíricos de intervenções durante e após o período de Guerra Fria, a fim de investigar as possibilidades de uma mudança no relacionamento entre ordem e justiça desde o início da década de 1990 até os dias mais contemporâneos. / The moral and political decision between doing something and doing nothing at the occasion of humanitarian emergencies, such as genocide, mass murders and ethnic cleansing all around the world remains to be the principal dilemma of decision making in the area of international relations and as a controversial subject as well as for the Political Theory as for the Theory of International Relations. The complexity and controversy of this phenomenon will be analyzed from the perspective that the humanitarian interventions demand the neglected place of moral considerations as well as for the political practice as for the theoretical reflections of the mainstream of international relations. In this manner, the main objective of this research is the analysis of humanitarian interventions from the relation between order and justice on a normative perspective. It is the reflection of connection and combination between this two ideas so much essential for the practical and theoretical understanding of international relations, that will be the groundwork for the search for new normative interpretations in relation to this phenomenon. As such, the theoretical and normative reflection of humanitarian interventions will be illustrated on empirical examples of interventions during and after the period of Cold War, to investigate the possibilities of changes in relation between order and justice since the beginning of the decade of 1990 until the more recent past.

Although United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (UNPKO) are said to protect humanitarian rights, peacekeepers are found to commit sexual assault, war crimes, and gross negligence. International legal immunities exempt peacekeepers and the UN from criminal liability and civil litigation. Whereas the literature on peacekeeper abuses conceptualizes the problem to be one of implementation of immunities, this thesis contends that such views are uncritical towards peacekeeping, immunity itself, and international society that organizes UNPKO. I theorize that the legal structures permitting such abuses (e.g. the UN Charter) render individuals expendable and hence objectified for the sake of international order. The argument presents a case study of the Srebrenica Massacre and ensuing legal cases to illustrate how immunities objectify individuals. Drawing on Agamben's theory of homo sacer, I introduce the term civis sacer to describe individuals excluded from international law with UNPKO immunities that objectifies them for the sake of maintaining international order. / Graduate / 0616

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / The dissertation examines three military interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa which took place in the mid and late 1990s in Rwanda, the DRC and Lesotho. These interventions took place despite high expectations of international and regional peace on the part of most analysts after the collapse of cold war in 1989. However, interstate and intrastate conflicts re-emerged with more intensity than ever before, and sub-Saharan Africa proved to be no exception.The study sets out to analyse the motives and/or causes of military interventions in Rwanda in 1990, the DRC in 1996-7, and the DRC military rebellion and the Lesotho intervention in 1998. In analysing these interventions, the study borrows extensively from the work of dominant security theorists of international relations, predominantly realists who conceptualise international relations as a struggle for power and survival in the anarchic world. The purpose of this analysis is fourfold; firstly, to determine the reasons for military interventions and the extent to which these interventions were conducted on humanitarian grounds; secondly, to investigate the degree to which or not intervening countries were spurred by their national interests; thirdly, to assess the roles of international organisations like Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations, in facilitating these interventions; as well as to evaluate the role of parliaments of intervening countries in authorising or not these military interventions in terms of holding their Executives accountable. In this context, the analysis argues that the intervening countries; Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Chad, Namibia, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe appeared to have used intervention as a realist foreign policy tool in the absence of authorisation from the United Nations and its subordinate bodies such as the OAU and SADC. / South Africa

The main ambition of this doctoral thesis is to contribute to the development of interdisciplinary application of the concept of moral hazard developedin economic and insurance theory to the context of the inter-state conflicts with potential international intervention. The basic theoretical framework used in the thesis is derived from the concept of moral hazard of humanitarian intervention by Alan Kuperman who claims that the newly established norm of humanitarian intervention may well have unintended negative consequences. Kuperman argues that if the mere existence of insurance creates sufficient incentive for the insured to modify their behavior to the extent that they engage in the riskier behavior due to the fact that they are insured against the consequences of their actions, the rebels may well optimize their behavior in the same way. Currently, the transfer of the moral hazard theory to the context of interventions is hindered by a number of existing obstacles stemming from the differences in these areas. This thesis concentrates on reduction of three main identified drawbacks and addresses them by formulating three main research questions and derived hypothesis. The aim of this approach is to examine the limits of application and create the space for development of the concept of moral hazard of humanitarian intervention in the future research. (1) What is the interpretation potential, value added and limits of application of economic theory of moral hazard to the context of humanitarian intervention from the theoretical perspective? Hypothesis 1:The concept of moral hazard represents an efficienttool for evaluation of humanitarian intervention. (2) What is the potential of causal mechanism established by the Kuperman´s hypothesis to explain the reasons why in certain cases the state decides to escalate the inter-state conflict despite the public threats of intervention at a general level of research? Hypothesis 2: The threat of intervention causes the escalation of the inter-state conflict. (3) To what extent does Kuperman´s hypothesis modified to the conflict in Kosovo correspond with the actual state of affairs and their development? Hypothesis 3: The threat of intervention NATO/USA caused the escalation of conflict in Kosovo.