The purpose of this study is to determine if the United Nations is structured in a manner that allows for it to effectively protect its principles while meeting the challenges emerging from the increasing number of security threats carried out by violent non-state actors. The United Nations, through the strategies of collective security and sovereign equality, aspires to have its member states prevent war through the peaceful settlement of disputes. This thesis argues that, by examining the legal norms that govern the methods in which member states are authorized to use force, the foundation and principles of the United Nations are to promote collective security through the avoidance of war. The United Nations' Charter only outlines a method for how sovereign states are to handle disputes with other states. The Charter fails to establish an effective method for states to respond to violence that originates from a non-state source. States therefore have elected to respond to aggression by non-state actors in terms that are not in accordance with the United Nations' Charter. This thesis therefore argues that any member state that chooses to use force against another state, specifically due to that state being the perceived origin of violent non-state aggression, without the approval of the United Nations Security Council, is doing so illegally and undermining the integrity of the organization. Since the United Nations' Charter fails to make provisions for the use of force against violence by non-state on state actors, it would seem wise for the United Nations to update its Charter to reflect a more efficient method for states to respond to non-state aggression. Unless the United Nations modernizes to respond to this tactic and outlines a strict method for states to respond to these situations, the United Nations will grow increasingly irrelevant. The thesis is organized into four main parts. The introduction describes the legal foundation of the United Nations and argues that its integrity is based upon the concept of collective security. This examination will explore the historical growth of collective security through the successes and failures of organizations who have previously employed its principles. This section will go into detail on the main principles of the United Nations Charter, specifically when the use of force is permissible by the organization. The first chapter offers a historical examination into the growth of non-state actors and the terrorist tactics they have employed. Terrorism is a tactic that aspires to disrupt society through the threat or usage of violence. This tactic typically uses or threatens to use violence in an attempt to gain footage in political, economic, religious or social issues. This analysis will offer evidence into the effectiveness of this tactic for inflicting civilian casualties and disrupting the peace of states. The second chapter is an analysis of how the United Nations has evolved to address the global growth of terrorism. This analysis will be supported by the legal documentation that the United Nations has passed to address terrorism. The main method in which the United Nations has employed to suppress terrorism is sanctions. This section will detail cases where the United Nations has used economic sanctions as a method to punish states that support terrorism. The third chapter of this thesis will offer an in-depth analysis of instances where, despite structures that the United Nations has in place to suppress terrorism, member states have determined that their state is not adequately protected from terrorism. In turn, these states have used force against another sovereign state without a Security Council mandate. By doing this, the member states have violated United Nations articles governing the use of force and the notion of collective security. The final section of this thesis will offer recommendations on necessary changes to the United Nations Charter regarding the use of force against violence by non-state on state actors. More efficient legal framework is necessary in the United Nations Charter to allow for states to capably and legally respond to the growth of terrorism. This thesis demonstrates that the current structure of the United Nations is incapable of controlling or responding to violent non-state actors. Additionally, with the mounting number of occurrences where a member state elects to use force against another sovereign state in response to terrorism, the core principles and purpose of the United Nations are becoming moot. This thesis will conclude by exploring possible reform within the United Nations by allowing for member states to legally and effectively respond to the terrorist activities of violent non-state actors. This reform would be achieved by outlining legal action allowed by a state when attacked or threatened with an attack by a non-state actor. / Master of Arts

By some accounts, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) created a paradigm shift in American foreign policy whereby terrorist organizations receive a lot more attention than they did prior to 9/11, especially in terms of U.S. military intervention. Moreover, some argue that this represents a shift in international politics whereby non-state actors have more power than they did before 9/11. However, others maintain that terrorism in the post-9/11 era is indicative of continuity in international politics. They argue that despite any of the immediate consequences of using military force to respond to the 9/11 attacks, the distribution of capabilities among states in the international system has not changed from the pre-9/11 era. This thesis empirically tests the notion of continuity in international politics through a case study of U.S. military intervention and threat perception. This research analyzes how these two concepts evolve from the post-Cold War era into the post-9/11 era. To the extent that U.S. military intervention and threat perception are comparable before and after 9/11, this is indicative of continuity in international politics. Conversely, contrast across 9/11 indicates change in international politics. Though this thesis finds considerable empirical evidence supporting continuity in international politics in the post-9/11 world, it also finds empirical evidence for change which cannot be ignored. / Master of Arts / On September 11, 2001 (9/11), the United States was attacked on its own territory for the first time since Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7, 1941. The difference on 9/11 was that the aggressors were stateless terrorists and not uniformed military members of a rival nation state. The United States is the most powerful country in the world, and it could not stop a small band of religious extremists from destroying the symbolic World Trade Center towers, causing major harm to the Pentagon, and claiming thousands of innocent American lives. As a result, the U.S. launched two of its largest military interventions in history by sending tens of thousands of troops to Afghanistan in 2001 and then to Iraq in 2003. These interventions were also two of the longest interventions in U.S. history. Does this mean that the U.S. perceives threats to its national security— especially those from non-state actors—to be greater after 9/11? And does this mean that the U.S. will use military intervention more in the post-9/11 era than it did before 9/11? This thesis empirically measures U.S. military intervention and threat perception from the end of the Cold War to the end of President Obama’s first term to determine how they compare before and after 9/11. This research then draws some conclusions from this analysis to determine to what extent the U.S.’s behavior after 9/11 indicates that non-state actors have acquired meaningful power in a way that causes nation-states to worry. This thesis finds ample support for the idea that the U.S.—and all nation states—still retain the overwhelming majority of the political power to be had by all actors, whether state or non-state. However, it also finds support for the notion that non-state actors have wielded real power as measured by the U.S.’s increased threat perception and use of military intervention after 9/11.

Post-war countries are among the most difficult policy arenas for international and domestic actors. The challenge is not only to stop violence and prevent violence from rekindling, but moreover to help countries reset their internal relations on a peaceful path. The indirect, long-term effects of wars further exaggerate this challenge. Many of these relate to political and social aspects of post-war countries. Lasting impressions of human rights abuses committed during wars continue to shape the relations among members of societies for decades to come. Both, socio-economic impacts and political impacts challenge the stability of post-war countries for many years. The challenges to public health have been found to be especially severe and affect disproportionately the civilian population of post-war countries. Environmental and climate change exposes post-war populations further to new risks, exaggerating the human costs of war long after active combat has ceased. These challenges are not new. The problem, however, is that in practice all these elements are simultaneously happening in today’s peacebuilding interventions. Yet, practitioners as well as researchers remain settled in a silo mentality, focusing only on one aspect at a time. As such they are unaware of the unintended consequences that their focus has on other important processes. The four essays that lie at the heart of this dissertation provide new insight into the linkages between the social, political and ecological processes in post-war societies and how the interactions of different groups of actors are shaping the prospects for peace. The argument drawn out in this dissertation is that to build peace we need to acknowledge and understand this long-term interplay of social, political, and ecological processes in post-war countries. It will be crucial to understand the potential and dynamics of natural resources and environmental issues in this context. As the essays in this dissertation show, the interactions of these processes divisively shape the post-war landscape. It is therefore essential to build a peace that is ecologically sensitive, while equally socially and politically relevant and desirable. I call this sustainable peace.

This dissertation investigates how actors without the means of state power can affect the behavior of warring parties in order to end civil conflicts. Drawing on the intervention and mediation literature, I propose a theoretical framework that presents causal mechanisms for various forms of non-state conflict management to contribute to conflict resolution. The research distinguishes between direct mediation, capacity-building, and problem-solving approaches, and analyzes the approaches’ potential contributions to shorter wars and more sustainable peace. On the one hand, non-state actors can be substitutes for governmental or inter-governmental mediators. They derive legitimacy from long-standing relations with the conflict parties, and their claims to neutrality are more believable than those of powerful states with strong national interests. Further, a confidential and deliberate process can lead to more stable agreements. On the other hand, NGOs and others can prepare or enhance ongoing high-level negotiations by giving parties the tools they need to engage with each other constructively, and by improving attitudes and changing perceptions. The data collected for this dissertation allows me to test hypotheses for the sample of African internal conflicts (1990-2010) with econometric means. Results confirm that non-state conflict management is a significant precursor to high-level mediation. I find further that conflict dyads that experience non-state conflict management in one year are significantly more likely to end in the following year. Unofficial diplomacy is significantly related to lower conflict severity, as well as to a more stable post-conflict peace. The findings challenge the common assumption that governments are the only actors in international relations that matter. In fact, non-state actors make important contributions to conflict resolution, and conflict parties as well as governmental mediators should consider cooperating with them in their search for peace.

Esta tese aborda a ascensão de atores não estatais na Política Ambiental Internacional. De forma mais precisa, a cooperação entre ONGs, comunidades locais e o setor privado em arenas transnacionais, o \"novo modo\" de governança global. O objetivo é mostrar que os atores não estatais têm desempenhado um papel importante na governança da biodiversidade como \"global governors\", uma vez que as Organizações Internacionais têm delegado cada vez mais funções a atores não-estatais. Por meio de estudos de caso envolvendo a Organização do Tratado de Cooperação Amazônica, a União para o Comércio BioÉtico, e a Natura, esta pesquisa contribui teoricamente e empiricamente para a literatura em Relações Internacionais e Ciência Política ao responder a seguinte questão de pesquisa: em que medida as ONGs, o setor privado e as comunidades locais contribuem para o processo de implementação da Convenção sobre Diversidade Biológica (CDB)? / This dissertation addresses the rise of non-state actors in International Environmental Politics. More precisely, it tackles the cooperation among NGOs, local communities and the private sector in transnational arenas, the \"new mode\" of global governance. The aim is to show that non-state actors have played a major role in biodiversity governance as \"global governors\" given that International Organizations have increasingly delegated functional roles to non-state actors. Through case studies involving the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization, the Union for Ethical BioTrade, and Natura, this research study contributes theoretically and empirically to the literature in International Relations and Political Science by answering the following research question: to what extent do NGOs, the private sector and local communities contribute to the implementation process of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)?

Do terrorist organisations have an effect on the sustainability of peace agreements? In this paper, I investigate the potential consequences of including armed non-state actors in peace agreements. Specifically, I focus on the most controversial type of actor: terrorist organisations and how they affect the sustainability of peace agreements. I utilise a unique dataset covering all intrastate peace agreements and designated terrorist organisations between 1998 – 2011, and employ a survival analysis through a cox proportional hazard model. I find strong evidence suggesting that the presence of terrorist organisations – both in conflicts and in peace agreements – have a significantly destabilising effect on the sustainability of peace agreements. I also find evidence which suggest that more complex power sharing arrangements could be a viable option to combat the destabilising effect of terrorist actors, although this effect might not be as strong in peace process agreements.

This dissertation examines the problems associated with the restrictive interpretation of Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations (hereinafter referred to as UN Charter) to the threat or use of force. This restrictive approach appears no longer helpful in furthering the maintenance of international peace and security. Equally, it does not adequately protect the entire territory of States for the following two reasons. Firstly, the UN member States shelter in the first limb of Article 2(4) to engage in conducts that violate the territory of other States while claiming subservience to the provision of Article 2(4). This occurs through mere frontier incidents, covert and overt support of the activities of the non-State actors. However, the State practice shows that such conducts are always resisted by the victim State no matter how insignificant the breach might be. Secondly, the UN member States have asserted their jurisdiction in cyberspace by adopting appropriate legislation to regulate the cyberspace activities and to curb cybercrimes. To legislate is an exercise of the sovereign power which is by nature, territorial. Thus, it is difficult to equate the non-kinetic character of the cyberspace activities to physical armed attack if Article 2(4) were narrowly construed. Because of these developments, this dissertation advocates for a broad interpretation of Article 2(4), which is respect for the inviolability of State territory. The fact that State practice is repugnant to mere frontier incidents indicates that the restrictive approach is unacceptable. Moreover, Article 2(7) of the UN Charter which prohibits intervention in the internal affairs of a State supports a broad approach. This dissertation adds to the scholarly debate as to whether Article 2(4) applies in cyberspace. It answers in the affirmative if the international community accepts the broad interpretation it proposes. Otherwise, the answer would be negative given the non-kinetic nature of the cyberspace activities.

<p>This dissertation explains the influence of ethnic non-state actors on the management of International Crises. I begin by arguing that when actively engaged in a crisis, ethnic actors contribute to; crisis violence, indecisive outcomes, and the escalation of interstate tensions. They do so because their more robust sponsorship allows them to drive relatively hard bargains with the state they are in conflict with. The analysis contributes to the development of theory by filling a gap in the literature and helping to resolve an important debate. Here I consider the entire population of non-state actors as a topic for analysis. This is in contrast to the general trend, which is to treat non-state actors as part of the landscape in studies that are otherwise concerned with ethnic conflict, terrorism or nation-building. In addition, the analysis here helps resolve a debate between bargaining theorist and ethnic conflict scholars concerning the relevance of ethnicity for our understanding of (both interstate and intrastate) conflict. In particular it identifies mechanisms specifically associated with ethnic rebel groups and demonstrates that ethnicity has an influence on interstate conflict through the actions of violent non-state actors. In the analysis I build on the logic above to develop a series of testable hypotheses. I then collect a new data-set of crisis-dyad-years and identify each crisis with a participating non-state actor (NSA-Crises) as well as those with ethnic non-state actors. Next I conduct a series of quantitative test of the relationship between ethnic actor participation and crisis management. The results demonstrate that ethnically mobilized rebel groups influence crises in unique ways, causing higher levels of violence and a higher incidence of stalemate. These findings are robust to various model specifications and the relationship between ethnic actors and crisis management is not conditioned by state-based sponsorship. I conclude with a discussion of the implications of this analysis for both theory and policy-making.</p> / Dissertation

This thesis examines TOBB within the global and national socioeconomic context in which it operates, focusing on the last decade. Though states are the main governing bodies and important actors, the role of non-state actors (NSAs) is becoming increasingly important as they are able to intervene and influence policy decisions through various activities. They matter in issues regarding globalization and governance. They interact with various other actors, they have a role in governance schemes and they may have the capability to effect acceleration of globalization. In return they are also affected by this process. For this research project TOBB has been chosen as a case study to evaluate the impact of such institutions in this process. Information on TOBB, including its chamber features, its interactions in governance, its special projects, and its view-point (made public through certain declarations and criteria), the economic platforms in which it participates, its contribution to G20 meetings and establishment of C20 all show that TOBB has taken an active stand in this process during the last decade. The context within which TOBB operates is an enabling one, both domestically and internationally. A comparison of TOBB with FICCI, its organizational counterpart in India, further demonstrates that the overall impact of similar institutions, in our case chambers, is larger when the system is taken as a whole. In this thesis it is argued that TOBB &ldquo / matters&rdquo / and is able to intervene and influence decision making processes.

Many contemporary states and historic political entities walled their borders stressing the idea that these barriers would protect their homelands from external threats and thus, achieve security. Although this security argument has prevailed, the political science literature fails to offer a systematic empirical examination of the relationship between barriers and cross-border threats. This research attempts to bridge this gap by answering the question: What are the actual security outcomes of physical barriers on borders? And thus, under what conditions do barriers succeed/fail to achieve security? This paper posits that, in some cases, building barriers on borders to stop non-state actors’ attacks escalate conflict. It demonstrates that when militants have supply institutions, they will manage to increase their attacks and shift to new tactics despite the barrier. It also studies the Israeli Gaza Strip Fence and offers an analysis based on patterns of the relationships between features of the barrier and the Gaza attacks. these patterns are derived from a quantitative dataset built by the researcher and are also supplemented by qualitative data about the case. / text