No description available.

Esta dissertação analisa uma novidade introduzida na política externa brasileira pelo governo de Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva: a não-indiferença. Esta diretriz surgiu como contraponto ao princípio da não-intervenção, no entanto o governo não delimitou adequadamente como aplicá-la, tendo em vista que em contextos similares a diplomacia Lula tomou atitudes diferentes. Para isso, são estudados sete casos de atuação do Brasil com relação a outros países: Venezuela, Bolívia, Paraguai, Honduras, Cuba, Irã e Haiti. A hipótese que orientou este estudo é de que na busca por aumentar o perfil político do Brasil, representado pela candidatura a um assento permanente no Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, o governo brasileiro exerceu um excessivo ativismo que exigiu esforços políticos (omitindo-se inclusive em questões sobre direitos humanos), financeiros e militares. A diplomacia da solidariedade surge nesse contexto como justificativa à mediação de crises, cooperação técnica e até mesmo à intervenção, da qual o engajamento brasileiro no Haiti seria o melhor exemplo devido a sua multidimensionalidade. / The present dissertation analyzes an innovation in Brazilian foreign policy introduced by the Lula da Silva administration: the non-indifference. This guideline emerged in opposition to the principle of non-intervention, however the government did not define it properly nor have created rules to enforce it, considering that Lula`s diplomacy had different approaches to similar situations. To find out more about this trend, it was chosen seven case studies in which Brazilian foreign policy had to cope with other countries, such as: Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay, Honduras, Cuba, Iran and Haiti. The hypothesis which has oriented this research addresses that in order to increase Brazil`s political profile, represented by the pursue for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, the government has excessively raised its initiatives abroad which required political (neglecting human rights), financial and military efforts. The diplomacy of solidarity emerges as an argument to justify the Brazilian role in peace talks, cooperation measures and even intervention, which makes Haiti the best example due its multidimensionality.

Esta dissertação analisa uma novidade introduzida na política externa brasileira pelo governo de Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva: a não-indiferença. Esta diretriz surgiu como contraponto ao princípio da não-intervenção, no entanto o governo não delimitou adequadamente como aplicá-la, tendo em vista que em contextos similares a diplomacia Lula tomou atitudes diferentes. Para isso, são estudados sete casos de atuação do Brasil com relação a outros países: Venezuela, Bolívia, Paraguai, Honduras, Cuba, Irã e Haiti. A hipótese que orientou este estudo é de que na busca por aumentar o perfil político do Brasil, representado pela candidatura a um assento permanente no Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, o governo brasileiro exerceu um excessivo ativismo que exigiu esforços políticos (omitindo-se inclusive em questões sobre direitos humanos), financeiros e militares. A diplomacia da solidariedade surge nesse contexto como justificativa à mediação de crises, cooperação técnica e até mesmo à intervenção, da qual o engajamento brasileiro no Haiti seria o melhor exemplo devido a sua multidimensionalidade. / The present dissertation analyzes an innovation in Brazilian foreign policy introduced by the Lula da Silva administration: the non-indifference. This guideline emerged in opposition to the principle of non-intervention, however the government did not define it properly nor have created rules to enforce it, considering that Lula`s diplomacy had different approaches to similar situations. To find out more about this trend, it was chosen seven case studies in which Brazilian foreign policy had to cope with other countries, such as: Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay, Honduras, Cuba, Iran and Haiti. The hypothesis which has oriented this research addresses that in order to increase Brazil`s political profile, represented by the pursue for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, the government has excessively raised its initiatives abroad which required political (neglecting human rights), financial and military efforts. The diplomacy of solidarity emerges as an argument to justify the Brazilian role in peace talks, cooperation measures and even intervention, which makes Haiti the best example due its multidimensionality.

As operações de manutenção da paz da Organização das Nações Unidas vêm sendo empregadas há mais de 60 anos com o objetivo de assegurar a paz e a segurança internacionais. A partir dos conflitos da Somália, Bósnia e Ruanda ocorridos na década de 1990, caracterizados pelas massivas violações de direitos humanos e pela incapacidade da Organização de impedi-las, esta deu início a uma série de debates acerca de como melhor operacionalizar suas peacekeeping operations, a fim de que violações como aquelas não mais voltassem a ocorrer. Ademais, o entendimento, por parte do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, de que violações de direitos humanos e estabilidade internacional guardam estreita relação, colaborou para que esses debates se desenvolvessem. O presente trabalho tem como obejtivo analisar as propostas sugeridas com vistas ao aperfeiçoamento do modus operandi das peacekeeping operations em virtude das citadas violações de direitos humanos e a verificar se tais propostas estão sendo aplicadas nas operações de manutenção da paz atuais / The peacekeeping operations of the United Nations have been used for over 60 years with the goal of ensuring international peace and security. From the conflicts in Somalia, Bosnia and Rwanda occurred in the 1990s, characterized by massive human rights violations and the inability of the Organization of preventing them, United Nations have initiated a series of debates about how to best operationalize its peacekeeping operations, in manner that those violations no longer occur. Moreover, the understanding by the United Nations Security Council that human rights violations and international stability are closely related, contributed to the development of these discussions. The present work aims, therefore, to assess the proposals suggested for the improvement of the modus operandi of peacekeeping operations in view of the aforementioned human rights violations and to verify whether they are being applied in todays peacekeeping operations.

O objetivo central desta tese é o de analisar a participação de Organizações Não Governamentais (ONGs) internacionais nas políticas e práticas do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas (CSNU) voltadas às agendas temáticas Crianças e Mulheres. Com base no estudo de duas coalizões, Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict e NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security, busca-se examinar o panorama político e normativo que condiciona a atuação das ONGs, bem como as estratégias específicas utilizadas por elas para adentrar no domínio de paz e segurança internacionais. Pretende-se discutir se as ONGs estão presentes nas discussões do órgão e, caso afirmativo, em que medida suas estratégias influenciam as decisões estatais. A metodologia empregada foi a análise dos documentos divulgados pelas coalizões e das resoluções aprovadas pelo CSNU. Além disso, foram realizadas entrevistas com funcionários das coalizões e das missões estatais para entender como funcionam as relações entre as ONGs e o CSNU. A partir das perguntas de pesquisa e da metodologia empregada, o estudo discutiu proposições teóricas sobre a possibilidade de os atores não estatais interferirem nas deliberações intergovernamentais. Sugere-se que o enquadramento das ideias e normas, a formação de coalizões e a mobilização por meio de redes de advocacia criam estímulos que aumentam as chances de os ativistas influenciarem as decisões dos Estados-membros do CSNU. As conclusões desta tese permitem considerar, de um lado, a participação das ONGs num espaço tradicionalmente fechado à sua presença e, de outro, o desenvolvimento do CSNU, com destaque às adaptações que viabilizaram uma maior aproximação com as ONGs. / The aim of this thesis is to analyze the participation of international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in the policies of the United Nations Security Council on Children\'s and Women\'s issues. Based on the study of two coalitions, Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict and NGO Working Group on Women, Peace, and Security, it seeks to examine the political and normative framework that conditions the performance of NGOs. Furthermore, it looks at specific strategies used by them to enter into the field of international peace and security. The intention is to verify if NGOs are present in the discussions of this body and, if so, to what extent they influence state\'s decisions. From these research questions, the study discusses theoretical propositions about the possibility of non-state actors\' interference in intergovernmental deliberations. It suggests that framing of ideas and norms, the formation of coalitions and the mobilization through advocacy networks increase the likelihood of an impact on the decisions of member states. The conclusions allow us, firstly, to reflect upon the participation of NGOs in a space traditionally closed to their presence and, secondly, to visualize the development of the UNSC, highlighting some adaptations that led to a greater proximity with NGOs.

The international community has long relied on United Nations (UN) peace operations as the means of creating and maintaining international peace and security, however the realities of what a “successful” mission looks like remains obscured, as the experiences and definitions of success may differ between the various players involved. While a shared definition of success and operational structure remains elusive, it is clear that the assessment of UN missions must be conducted in a holistic manner, from mandate crafting, to mission transition and exit. Among these realities is that the assessment of UN peace operation success is all too often hindered by political partiality with the determination of mission success frequently held hostage by faulty political processes. It is essential that evaluative frameworks encompass the various stages of a peace operation, in order to illustrate the political challenges that often obstruct the planning and assessment of a UN mission. Highlighting the political obstacles associated with holistic mission planning and assessment, against the backdrop of ongoing, ad hoc UN peace operation deployments to Haiti, breaks down existing normative positions and exposes the realities and voids in current methodology.

Magister Legum - LLM / This paper analyses head of state immunity, a traditional rule of international law, in relation to the indictments by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2009 against the current Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir. It can be agreed that the doctrine of immunity in international law attempts to overcome the tension between the protection of human rights and the demands of state sovereignty. The statutes and decisions of international criminal courts make it clear that no immunity for international crimes shall be attached to heads of states or to senior government officials. However, the case against the Sudanese President, where the jurisdiction of the ICC was triggered by the UN Security Council‟s referral of the situation in Darfur to the Court, represents the first case where a serving head of state has, in fact, been indicted before the ICC. From this case, a number of legal issues have arisen; such as the questions where the ICC‟s jurisdiction over an incumbent head of state, not party to the ICC Statute, is justified, and the obligations upon ICC state parties to surrender such a head of state to the requesting international criminal court. This paper gives an analysis of these questions. / South Africa

Thesis (Ph.D. (Political Science)) -- University of Limpopo, 2022 / Much of the literature on the recent Libyan conflict is framed through a Westernised lens. This is an epistemic and ontological setback for Africa. Hence, the transition from the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) to African Union (AU) with the principle of, “African solution to African problems,” seemed to be a plausible one after a number of imported solutions and western powers’ interventions that often left the continent worse off than before. Syria shared a similar situation with Libya but the intervention from the western powers differed significantly. Against this setback, this study employs Afrocentricity as an alternative theoretical lens to examine the incompatibilities of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s (NATO) involvement in the Libyan conflict within the context of the African Agenda. The objectives of the study were to evaluate the relations between AU and UNSC on the Libyan crisis, how the UNSC Res 1973 was understood and implemented AU and NATO and to reflect on the implications of NATO led military intervention under the pretext of Responsibility to Protect civilians in Libya. The involvement of NATO’s military force sealed not only the fate of Libyans with no long term plan to the resolution of the crisis but also severely restricted and undermined the efforts of AU in Libya. The efforts of AU and its roadmap were completely negated when NATO forces started their air raids. Divisions were clearly evident within NATO members with Germany and Netherlands opposing the motives of NATO. The intervention by NATO facilitated regime change and flooded the region with illicit trade in arms and goods, harboured armed extremists’ groups, and terrorists. The cauldron of all of the above effectively destabilised the region. It also exposed deep divisions within AU members, lack of coordination and the effects of limited resources on operations that could be handled continentally to avoid unsavoury interventions. In relation to the Libyan crisis, AU and NATO had divergent interests and could not cooperate in finding long lasting solutions. AU should in the future be proactive in resolving conflicts with the continent and should be prepared to fund its own operations in order to reduce dependence on foreign assistance in similar situations in the future.

The thesis purports to assess the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in maintaining international peace and security and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in prosecuting individuals who have committed severe violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international law, during humanitarian and counter-terrorism operations. The thesis endeavours to highlight the failures of both institutions, firstly, the UNSC being unable to fulfil its institutional mandate, which is mainly attributed to the abuse of veto privileges granted to the five permanent members (P5). This has effectively allowed individuals from the militaries of the P5 and their allies elude criminal liability, promoting a culture of impunity. The UNSC’s failure to prevent P5 members use of unauthorised military force in pursuing counter-terrorism operations and interpose expeditiously in humanitarian crises, have also contributed to the erosion of the institutions’ legitimacy, which is further perpetuated by the USA’s continued ‘War on Terror’ doctrine after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Secondly, the ICC’s inability to prosecute individuals for crimes under the Rome Statute will also be highlighted as the principle of complementarity and the court’s inability to enforce arrest warrants are significant factors contributing to the institutions inability to administer international criminal justice. The thesis draws upon practical examples to substantiate the failures of both institutions by referring to the conflicts in: Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Syria and Libya. Before concluding the UNSC and the ICC have become futile, the thesis will then make recommendations for reform and propose a novel solution to restore legitimacy back to both institutions.

The “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine was created with the purpose of providing an implementation mechanism for the international community to halt and prevent mass atrocity conflicts, however, it is not a legally binding framework, and requires the UNSC’s engagement for its successful implementation. Whilst R2P is a rhetorically compelling international norm, it falls apart in practice. The lack of consistency in its implementation and the UNSC’s inaction to various cases of mass atrocity, which are, in principle, applicable to the doctrine, has sparked controversy. This thesis examines conflicts in which R2P has been utilized and one conflict of similar dimensions in which the principle wasn’t applied, discussing the factors that could explain the question ‘why has the application of R2P been inconsistent at halting atrocity conflicts?’. By juxtaposing two theoretical lenses, Realism and English School, and applying a comparative analysis to these three cases, the thesis establishes that state behavior is driven by preserving power and resources, when it converges with upholding international norms and values. Thus, the thesis concludes that members of the Security Council will support R2P implementation and uphold shared norms and values, only when it serves their national interests.