The growing accessibility to the global community has allowed historically marginalized groups the opportunity to assert their positions on a global stage. The difficulty of States to enforce necessary protections of land and representation has allowed the entrance of new powerful international organizations with expansive networks to play a role in domestic policies. The largest indigenous group in Panama, the Ngöbe, has suffered from poor unification and political organization, weakening their position vis-à-vis the State. Recently, under the perceived threat of a large development project, the hydroelectric dam Chan 75, some Ngöbe groups have been able to make connections to bring awareness to their conflicts by appealing to distant sympathizers through international networks. These linkages are limited in their ability to force a change in national policy; however, these efforts are not in vain. The outcomes of the continuous negotiations that occur in the space of the physical development site are continuously changing to create the opportunity for the greater participation of the Ngöbe, who benefit from the leverage provided by international norms and vigilance.

No description available.

Truth commissions are bodies established in political transition, and they have the stated purpose of reckoning with human rights abuses committed by members of former regimes. The question driving this research is "Why have truth commissions increased so rapidly in the last 20 years?" This study moves beyond current research, which suggests that particular domestic political circumstances alone determine choice of transitional justice mechanisms. I argue that an international rule of behavior, the transitional restorative norm, has emerged and spread to decision-makers in countries of transition. In support of this notion, I perform a pre-theoretical historical analysis of transitional justice and develop a theory of decision-making in transition-which is later tested with quantitative statistics. This integrated approach allows for increased scientific rigor in the examination of international norms. Ultimately, the study demonstrates an interrelationship between shared ideas and political environments in the determination of domestic policy.

The use of child soldiers has troubled human rights activists, policy-makers, and local communities for decades. Although rebellions around the world routinely use children in their activities, many do not. Despite its overwhelming importance for conflict resolution, the topic of child soldiers remains understudied. My research blends classic rational choice and constructivist themes to develop an explanation for when child soldiers will be used, and when they will be avoided. The likelihood of child recruitment is influenced by the value of international opinion; this is determined by the groups' long-term goals. Secessionist rebellions desire to have their own state. However, statehood is jealously guarded by the international community and is only granted under extreme circumstances. The use of child soldiers has been condemned around the world as a crime against humanity, and it can curtail international support. Thus, secessionists should be the least likely rebel type to use child soldiers out of a concern to appear legitimate. Opportunistic rebellions face few constraints in their recruitment efforts. They do not desire international support because their long-term goal is the same as their short term goal: profit. Instead of refraining from using children in order to curry favor with external parties, they will abduct, adopt, and abuse children because they are cheaper to employ than adults. Opportunists are unconcerned with losing legitimacy or reducing the chances of victory. Therefore, they should be the most likely to use child soldiers. Concern for costs can affect all rebels. As duration grows, constraints over long-term legitimacy diminish. Therefore, all rebellions should be more likely to use child soldiers as duration increases. I test my theory quantitatively by looking at 103 rebel groups active between 1998-2008. I explore rebellions in Somalia, Colombia, Afghanistan and Sudan to further elucidate the causal mechanisms. There is considerable empirical support for the theory. These results offer policy-relevant conclusions in the areas of rehabilitation and conflict resolution. More importantly, they offer a workable strategy to curb the use of child soldiers in civil war.

This research takes the viewpoints of international regime, neo-realism, neo-liberalism and constructionism in analyzing the impact of international norms on state behaviors. The case study focuses on the impact of the international human rights norms on China¡¦s human rights issue. The finding of this research is that, with China¡¦s international socialization going deeper, China is eager to join and intervene in different international regimes and international organizations; China also regards international organization as the symbolic expansion of state authority. The main purpose of the international human rights norms is to promote democracy and protect human rights all over the world. In western perspectives, China can show its determination to obey international social norms and influnce its opinions about human rights by joining the international human rights norms. In China¡¦s points of view, human rights is a historic and domestic issue. The fundamental thought of the international human rights norms is from the traditional western culture; therefore China does not accept the whole idea of such international human rights norms. From the interaction between China and the international human rights norms, we can find out China totally recognizes the mainstream discourse of the international human rights norms. With the rise of China, China tries to manipulate rather than just yield (with some limits) to the international human rights norms.

In the decade from 1998 to 2008, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) was witness to one of the most brutal violent conflicts in recent history. Crimes against humanity and large-scale violations of human rights occurred on a regular basis, resulting in the death and displacement of millions of people. The international community responded to this crisis with humanitarian efforts such as the donation of billions of dollars in aid and engagement in diplomatic mediations. However, despite the increasing viability of humanitarian intervention as a policy option for international actors, as well as the ‘groundbreaking’ formal adoption of the Responsibility to Protect at the 2005 United Nations World Summit, no intervention was undertaken. This produces a puzzle: why, despite acknowledgement of the severity of the crisis, did the international community respond with humanitarianism, but stop short of intervening? The answer can be found in an examination of the international normative environment at the time of the conflict. Using a three-stage normative life-cycle model developed by Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, this thesis posits that the reason the international community engaged in humanitarian actions was because the norm of humanitarianism is at stage 2 of its life cycle, making it well-entrenched enough to compel members of the international community to act. However, the norm of humanitarian intervention is only at stage 1 of its life cycle, meaning that it is weak and underdeveloped. Its weakness is exacerbated by the fact that humanitarian intervention often clashes with the highly entrenched stage 3 norms of realpolitik, and specifically the norm of self-interested engagement, which demands that a state only become engaged with another if it is in the first state’s interests to do so. Thus, despite the brutality of the conflict, the norm of humanitarian intervention was not strong enough to provoke an intervention in the Democratic Republic of Congo. / Thesis (Master, Political Studies) -- Queen's University, 2009-09-18 02:05:57.536

In a recent paper Jan Ruzicka and Nicholas J. Wheeler have posited that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is an example of several ¿trusting relationships¿. The authors assert that ¿since the end of the 1990s the trusting relationships embodied in the NPT have come under strain¿ and that this accounts for the fact that the ¿treaty is facing growing pressures that are eroding what has been an effective barrier to nuclear weapons proliferation¿. This article questions the assumptions underlying this analysis. It argues that the approach taken by Ruzicka and Wheeler fundamentally misconceives the dynamics of nuclear non-proliferation. The policy implications generated by this approach are impractical and downright dangerous as they fail to address the causes of proliferation and instead exacerbate the problem further.

This study examines what frames the Swedish Lev Upp till Barnkonventionen campaign use, and whether the frames are in accordance to the frames suggested by Keck and Sikkink in their award-winning book Activists Beyond Borders. The Swedish Lev Upp till Barnkonventionen campaign is the only campaign in Sweden that aims to promote the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into Swedish law. It started in 2009 as a network driven by 7 organizations, UNICEF, BRIS, World Childhood Foundation, Swedish Save the Children (Rädda Barnen), ECPAT, Plan Sverige and SOS-Barnbyar, together with the Swedish Children‟s Ombudsman (Barnombudsman). An ideational analysis of the texts, that the campaign uses to appeal to society and persuade, shows that four frames are frequently used within the campaign. Two of the frames are in accordance with the proposed frames, being "bodily harm to innocent and vulnerable people" and "legal inequality". The other two frames set the problem to be poverty/economic vulnerability or psychological harm. Although, all four frames identified follow the three parts a frame should include according to Keck and Sikkink – a problem, a cause with a short causal chain and a specific type of action to solve the problem. This study has contributed with another case study to the limited amount of cases that study how international norms are framed in national contexts. Furthermore, this study has discovered that Sweden, although is using other frames too, use the frames that Keck and Sikkink have proposed.

Why have states requested international authorization for their projections of military force more after 1989? One perspective suggests powerful states should not make such requests. Rather, they should look to their own power instead of international organizations. Another view suggests international authorization is a way to provide credible signals about state intentions. A third perspective suggests states view international authorization of military force as appropriate. I establish that states have changed their behavior, requesting international authorization more often after 1989. Then, I develop hypotheses involving material power, burden-sharing, informational signaling, and international norms. I assess their ability to explain the increase in authorization requests through evidence from over 150 military force projections by a wide range of states and through a detailed evaluation of United States behavior. The U.S. provides a strong test case for the theories evaluated, since powerful states should be least susceptible to pressures for requesting authorization, and yet it does so more frequently after 1989. I find the expectation that states should request international authorization emerged after the U.S. set a precedent during the Persian Gulf War. The end of the Cold War changed the perceived "viability" of different strategies for projecting military force for U.S. policy-makers. Requesting authorization from the UN became a plausible alternative. The decision to request international authorization--and the justifications U.S. decision makers offered for doing so--led to the expectation by other states that the U.S. would do so for future projections of military force. This international norm helps explain the politics of international authorization for the airstrikes on Iraq (1998), the Iraq War (2003) and the Libyan intervention (2011). The response of other countries to the Clinton Administration's failure to request authorization for airstrikes on Iraq in 1998 demonstrates that expectations regarding whether the U.S. should request authorization had shifted. The subsequent consolidation of the norm helps explain the requests for authorization by the Bush Administration for the Iraq War in 2003 and by the Obama Administration for Libya in 2011. The dissertation increases our understanding of the relationship, and the role of authority, between states and international organizations.

In 1979 the United Nations passed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), an international bill of rights for women. Much scholarship has focused on the degree to which states have adopted these new international gender norms, but have paid little attention to the fact that norms change in the processes of implementation. This dissertation focuses on that process assessing the translation of international gender equality norm in Lebanon. The study traces global gender equality norms as they are translated into a complex context characterized by a political structure that divides powers according to confessional groups, a social structure that empowers men as heads of families, and a geopolitical structure that opposes a secular West to the Muslim East. Through a comparison of three campaigns – the campaign to combat violence against women, the campaign to change personal status codes, and the campaign to give women equal rights to pass on their nationality – the study traces different ways in which norms are translated as activists negotiate the structures that make up the Lebanese context. Through ethnographic research, the process of norm translation was found to produce various filters, i.e., constellations of arguments put forward by activists as they seek to match international norms to the local context. The dissertation identifies six such filters and finds that these filters often have created faithless translations of international norms.