As the ¿War on Terror¿ evolves into the ¿Long War¿ against Islamo-fascism, it demands an enduring commitment to ensuring the security of the United States and its allies. This policy is based on the requirement to maintain control in a fractured and unpredictable global environment, while paying little attention to the underlying issues that lead to insecurity. It is an approach that is manifestly failing, as the continuing problems in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate. Moreover, ¿control¿ implies the maintenance of a global order that focuses on power remaining in the hands of a transnational elite community, principally focused on North America and Western Europe, but extending worldwide. This elite largely ignores socio-economic divisions and environmental constraints, and sees continuing stability as being best achieved by the maintenance of the status quo, using force when necessary. This collection of essays by Professor Paul Rogers argues that this post-Cold War security paradigm is fundamentally misguided and unsustainable. It concludes with two new essays on the need for a new conception of global security rooted in justice and emancipation.

No description available.

United Nations (UN) peacekeeping principles affect all peacekeeping, thus it is important to under-stand their development. Many important changes in peacekeeping concern robustness and human security. This paper investigates developments in these two areas and their interrelation by means of a literature review, document analysis and case studies of two contemporary UN peacekeeping mis-sions. It identifies three generations in UN peacekeeping marked by changes in human security and robustness and relates these changes to the concept of sovereignty. Further, it identifies human secu-rity as the main motivation behind increasingly robust UN peacekeeping and finds that robust peacekeeping can, but does not necessarily, lead to greater human security.

The thesis results from a research project, combining elements of European law and public international law. The project focuses on the different forms of the use of force by the European Union in the sphere of the Common Security and Defence Policy as an integral part of the EU’s common foreign and security policy. It examines the conditions under which the European Union can engage in military crisis management missions from the perspective of European Union law as well as from the perspective of public international law. The main emphasis of the thesis is put on the former, analysing the EU’s ambitions to become an international security actor from an inside-out perspective. When addressing the vertical dimension of the EU and the use of force in more detail, the thesis analyses the extent to which the Member States are constrained in the conduct of their national foreign and security policy through decisions by the European Union in the sphere of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. With regards to the EU’s legal relationship with the United Nations, the thesis examines whether and if so to what extent the European Union, although not a member of the United Nations, is bound by UN Security Council resolutions in respect of the use of force. Based on the assumption that the EU is bound by UN Security Council resolutions imposing economic sanctions, the thesis uses a comparative method in order to show that the EU as an international organisation is bound by decisions of the UN Security Council in the sense that the EU is obliged to respect the wording and limits of a UN Security Council mandate to use force once it decides to contribute with an EU mission. If the EU decides not to accept a UN Security Council mandate, the thesis argues that the EU is under the obligation not to undermine the success of a UN authorised military intervention, in the spirit of a loyalty obligation. Apart from analyzing the interaction of the EU and the international legal framework, the thesis also uses a speculative approach in order to examine the implications of silence in the context of the use of force.

This two part thesis investigates the lack of definition of the wording “all necessary means” and how it ultimately impacts a decision making gap between the Security Council and the troop contributing countries regarding the use of force in UN peace operations. The assumptions are based on Reus-Smit’s constructivist theory, emphasizing that both politics and international law needs to be studied with a holistic approach in order to understand how the two realms shape each other. The assumption of this thesis is that “all necessary means” is not providing enough guidance to constrain the TCCs to behave as sovereign, equal actors in an anarchical structure. The second part of the thesis is a within-case-study of MONUC/MONUSCO, and the Security Council resolution 2098 that established the Force Intervention Brigade.

The EU has since 2003 carried out six military operations.  This thesis seeks to determine the circumstances under which the EU will, or will not, undertake military operations.  It does so through the study of two main cases of EU military operations: the case when an operation was planned in the Lebanon war 2006 but did not occur, and the positive case of EUFOR RD Congo that same year which did occur. Three additional cases are presented. An analytical tool built on the techniques of defence planning and concepts derived from the scholarly literature is applied to the cases for the purpose of identifying the main driving and inhibiting factors behind the operations. The functional  theme of the use of force and the organizational theme of the multilateralisation of intervention serve as the main scholarly concepts.  The interaction between the intervener and the local actors, as well as between political and resource factors, is introduced in order to create an integrated framework for the analysis of the dynamics at play in the EU’s use of force. The limitations to the "jus bellum" tradition is noted in the analysis of the EU´s operations that have situated themselves in a low-to-middle bandwidth in terms of interests and risks at stake. Among the findings, the growing importance of local actors in shaping the room for the EU´s deployment of military force stands out, as do resource constraints, in the EU´s case primarily in the form of its limited command and control structures but also through the overstretch of the global pool of expeditionary forces felt around 2006. As seen from the organizational perspective, the EU´s first military operations can best be understood in the context of the increasing role of regional security providers in an unofficial division of labour with regard to the multilateralisation of intervention. / <p>Avaliable in revised and extended version: "The EU and Military Operations. A comparative analysis".</p><p>http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415821360</p><p> </p>

in English The doctrine of "humanitarian intervention" has long been a controversial subject, both in law and in international relations, and remains so today. For humanitarian intervention is typical that it is a multidisciplinary issue. This problem is questionable not only from the point of view of law; however there also arise many ethic and moral dilemmas. The study handles the humanitarian intervention from the view of international law hence my aim is to outline the legal questions connected with this issue. At first it must be said that humanitarian intervention exists for a very long time although it has been subject of discussions for last ten or twenty years. What makes the humanitarian intervention such controversial point in question in contemporary international law? First of all the concept of humanitarian intervention must be distinguished from related concepts, such as "humanitarian action", "humanitarian operations", "humanitarian assistance", "intervention to protect nationals abroad", "intervention to facilitate self- determination", " pro-democratic intervention" and more other concepts closely link to humanitarian intervention If we start to concetrate just on humanitarian intervention there are questions to think about: Firstly, the main question is: What is the humanitarian...

Esta dissertação analisa o uso da força não letal pela polícia nas ações de policiamento e o papel que a qualificação profissional pode desempenhar como fator inibidor da violência policial e da exposição ao risco dos atores envolvidos nessas ações, retomando a discussão sobre a ação não-letal da polícia sob outro foco: a relação treinamento-performance. Embora a característica militar seja um fator preponderante nas relações entre os policiais, para efeito desta pesquisa, não é considerada determinante da violência policial. Este estudo visa explorar o cotidiano da relação polícia-cidadão e os determinantes do comportamento individual do policial nesses encontros. A hipótese central deste trabalho estabelece que o treinamento tem um papel significativo como um fator capaz de reduzir o emprego abusivo de força nos encontros do policial com o público e de melhorar a qualidade do trabalho policial de uma maneira geral, aumentando o grau de proteção, tanto do profissional quanto do público, e diminuindo a exposição de ambos ao risco. Esta dissertação O Uso da Força Não Letal Pela Polícia nos Encontros com o Público, introduz uma inovação metodológica, e representa um teste do método que utiliza a técnica da Observação Social Sistemática (OSS) do trabalho policial - a grande contribuição dessa pesquisa, em razão de ser uma técnica inédita em pesquisas acadêmicas no Brasil. / This text analyzes the use of non lethal force for the police in the policing and the role that the professional qualification can carry out as factor that can to inhibit the police violence and of the exhibition risk to the actors involved in those actions, retaking the discussion about the non lethal action of the police under other focus: the relationship training-performance. Although the military characteristic is a preponderant factor in the relationships among the policemen, for effect of this research, it is not considered determinant of the police violence. This study seeks to explore the daily of the relationship policecitizen and the determinant of the policeman\'s individual behavior in those encounters. The central hypothesis of this work establishes that the training has a significant role as a factor capable to reduce the abusive employment of force in the policeman\'s encounters with the public and of improving the quality of the police work in a general way, increasing the protection degree, so much of the professional as of the public, and decreasing the exhibition of both to the risk. This text - Use of the Non Lethal Force For the Police in the Encounters with the Public, introduces a methodological innovation, and it represents a test of the method that uses the technique of the Systematic Social Observation (SSO) of the police work - the great contribution of that research, in reason of being an original technique in academic researches in Brazil.

This study investigated law enforcement officers' perceptions of the legal, normative, and practical considerations that are implicit in their decisions when faced with using physical force. Law enforcement officers observe and protect fundamental human rights. A significant problem, however, is that physical force is sometimes misused, impacting public confidence in police services. The study was framed by Durkheim's conflict theory and Beirie's concepts of police corporate culture and social control. It used a grounded theory method and predeveloped case scenarios presented to 2 male focus groups of 7 and 6 participants respectively, and 2 female focus groups of 5 and 7 participants, who were police officers in Canada, to explore for gender differences in response strategies, decisions to use force, and arguments for their decisions, following the model set forth by Waddington (2009). Additionally, data were also collected through 12 individual semistructured interviews. Open, axial, and selective manual coding was used in the data analysis. The data collection and analysis for this study resulted in the development of, the paradigm of safety, a theory that reflects how female officers' use-of-force decisions differ from the decisions of their male colleagues. These decision factors, when incorporated into their response strategies, reflect the timing and need for using force. This study promotes positive social change by providing information that will inform police policies and training practices. This information will enable police administrators and legislators to enhance workplace safety for their officers that are more consistent with democratic rights and freedoms for citizens by reducing use-of-force in conflict circumstances.

Public opinion polls have shown the public lacks confidence in U.S. police to use appropriate amounts of force and treat racial minorities fairly, which undermines police legitimacy and the quality of life of all citizens. Although rules have been shown to positively constrain police uses of force, researchers have not demonstrated the effect of rules on racially influenced policing (RIP). In 2005, the RIP directive which prohibits officers from using race as a factor in taking discretionary actions was promulgated in New Jersey. The purpose of this study was to determine through the theoretical lens of Lipsky's street-level bureaucrat theory the influence of the RIP directive on municipal police officer uses of force upon non-Whites. A quantitative nonexperimental retrospective design was used to examine a stratified, proportionate random sample of 301 use of force reporting forms from municipal police agencies in one New Jersey county for a 5-year period before and after the enactment of the RIP directive. A binomial logistic regression indicated that the RIP directive had no influence on the use of force upon non-Whites. Suspect race did not significantly influence force outcomes. Scholarly implications include producing research based upon existing policy to better help inform evidence-based policymaking. Policy implications include police practitioners and policymakers actively monitoring officer uses of force for racial bias and broadening their examination to other issues affecting the problem of trust. Implications for social change include framing the problem within the public policy paradigm to promote political discourse, evidence-based decision making, and improved civilian oversight of the police, which could strengthen trust and police legitimacy.