Search results

Despite the burgeoning literature dealing with the democratic peace theory, there seems to be surprisingly little research done in actually analyzing how and why democracies cause peace. There is even less research done in empirically analyzing the “how” part of the normative aspects of the democratic peace theory. The purpose of this paper is to explain the theoretical assumptions and how interpersonal trust is linked to a country's preferences to go to war. In addition, a direct comparison is made between democratic and non‐democratic states to ascertain more clearly the effect of trust on decisions to go to war.

This study quantitatively examines the period from 1980 to 2001 and considers 62 democratic countries and 30 non‐democratic countries in their choices to engage in conflict.

The research project finds that interpersonal trust is strongly correlated with states' decisions to go to war.

This is the first time that a study has examined the role of interpersonal trust on a state's decision to go to war, as no scholarly work has been done in applying the study of interpersonal trust to studying the theory of democratic peace.

The article seeks to address the lack of serious, normative scenarios exploring peace in the Middle East.

Three normative, backcasted scenarios were written. These were derived from literature searches, interviews with experts in the field, and input from a three‐round Delphi. Actions were identified and rated by the Delphi panel in Rounds 1 and 2. Draft text with areas for comment throughout the scenarios was collected in Round 3 and used to improve the draft scenarios.

The scenarios address seven preconditions for peace in the Middle East: secure borders for Israel; establishment of a viable and independent Palestinian state; resolution of the Jerusalem question; ending violence by both sides and building confidence; social and economic development; education; and resolution of Palestinian refugee status.

The scenarios are intended for use in a variety of settings to help further the Middle East peace process.

Despite the abundant research on social movements, there is sparse scholarly investigation of the link between community settings and how they contribute to persistent protest participation. This paper illuminates the cultural and social mechanisms within a religious retirement community that engender members’ sustained commitment to a ten-year long peace protest. A shared religious-based collective identity also deepens activists’ commitment to this cause. This study draws on semi-structured interviews with 14 peace protesters who reside in this community at two points in time: 2010 and 2013.

This paper aims to explore if and how changes in social representations of conflict are designed and constructed in the formal political discourse.

Taking a psycho‐sociological approach and by relying on discourse analysis, it explores the discursive patterns used by the political leadership in order to legitimize either war or peace actions. Through the analysis of speeches that were given by Israeli prime ministers in the Knesset and in the context of warfare or peace processes, the paper traces changes in the historical narratives that frame Israel's cluster of societal beliefs in regards to the conflict, and further explores how these are being re‐narrated in light of the process of transition to peace.

The paper argues that both warfare and peace processes, representing the extreme options available in conflict, require broad public recruitment and immense rhetorical efforts on behalf of the political leadership to reason and legitimatize actions through the formal political discourse. The findings highlight the ways through which the political leadership in Israel justifies its actions and attempts to enlist public support as a prism to trace how societal beliefs have been narrated for the purpose of justifying warfare, and how the same beliefs are re‐narrated to justify conflict resolution.

The paper strives to shed light on the role played by the interplay between political discourse and societal beliefs in the context of transition to peace, and thus advances understandings of the linkage between internal processes and external circumstances, as mitigated by political discourse, in the context of conflict and conflict resolution.

As ethnic diversity is regarded as a determinant of growth, this study engages in an analysis of diversity as the forte behind better economic performance and where social stability of a nation is necessary to achieve growth. While these factors alone may not be sufficient to achieve growth and maintain social harmony, domestic institutions and good governance are regarded as vital factors.

Differential performances of diverse ethnic groups are most influential contributions of social capital and its growth impact. In this framework there is a larger role of aid to provide security to a nation to achieve its development objectives. An evaluation of ethnic diversity and land issues in Fiji is undertaken with concerns of a market economy, policies and governance.

An examination of the opposing nature of ethnic diversity and land issues in Fiji provides an insight not only of ethnic conflict, but also of the role of aid to solve conflict. A discussion on ethnicity and being equal in the market relates to the reason for equality before identity. The analysis indicates the role foreign aid can play to achieve stability and avoid ethnic conflict for growth in Fiji.

The paper indicates the global issues of inequality and conflict and policy implications for Fiji and the nations facing such problems and aid donors’ role for growth and development.

In this essay it is proposed first to draw the important distinction which exists in practice between the collective and procedure agreements and explain briefly the respective functions of each of these. An examination will then follow of the current legal status of the collective agreement in Great Britain where a discussion and analysis of various aspects of legal non‐enforceability will take place.

Purpose – The chapter deals with the lessons of conflict-resolutions and considers certain basic and widely debatable issues such as: international law's changes, a clash of national interests and the impact of the global media on the world public opinion in the case of armed interventions, and so on, with a focus on Russia's perception of main international conflicts.

Methodology/approach – The discussion about the Russian perception of prolonged, frozen, and new conflicts is illustrated by several case-studies: the conflict around the Serbian province of Kosovo, the Georgia-Russia war of 2008, and the 2010 upheaval in Kyrgyzstan. The analysis is qualitative.

Findings – The results highlight the Russian perception of the conflicts under consideration and point to the necessity for the work that needs to be done in the field of international law to get hold of the issue of possibly intervening in prolonged, frozen, and new conflicts.

Research limitations/implications – Implications for researchers include the need for a broader inspection of how the global media shape opinions. Next, practitioners may find the analysis of the Russian case relevant for their work.

Originality/value of paper – A case study with broader implications.

This chapter argues that the dead are stakeholders and that they should be regarded as such. In making that argument I will be exploring the claims of the philosopher Bob Brecher (2002) that we have real obligations to the dead because they made us what we are, if they were a part of our community. Indeed, Brecher (2002) argues that the dead never ceased ‘to be members of a particular community’ and therefore ‘the dead can be said to have interests’. This chapter explores the validity of their interests as stakeholders. Indeed, I argue that if they are not regarded as stakeholders, corporate management will overlook their interests. Admittedly, corporate managers might seem mindful of their interests. However, if they are not conceived of as stakeholders, such managers will not be primarily concerned with their interests, but with how other stakeholders might perceive those interests. In attempting to satisfy these other stakeholders’ perceptions of those interests, the actual interests of the dead could be overlooked. But that relies on the dead being legitimate stakeholders. To substantiate that status I therefore argue in this chapter that the dead are stakeholders, but also that their status as a stakeholder now that they are dead is dependent on their behaviour when they were alive, given Brecher's (2002) insistence as to them being a part of that community.

In arguing this, I utilize a recent article by Rosenbloom and Althaus (2010). I argue that the interest of the dead they mention in their article would best be served if they are considered as stakeholders. Indeed, that because Rosenbloom and Althaus (2010) do not consider those dead as stakeholders, their interests are never considered. I acknowledge though that being stakeholders relies on them remaining a part of that community (Brecher, 2002), which I argue they were a part of. If they do not remain a part of that community, I cannot argue that they are stakeholders. I therefore consider a historical argument which if accepted would prove that the dead which Rosenbloom and Althaus (2010) consider had not remained a part of that community and therefore cannot be accepted as stakeholders. This chapter rigorously examines the validity of that historical argument as to the behaviour of those dead when they were living, and whether their behaviour negates any claims as to them being stakeholders. This chapter completely refutes any arguments as to these dead being involved in such activities which would have removed them from their community and thus from being stakeholders. It furthermore argues that successfully rebutting such arguments is essential to my argument that the dead I am considering are stakeholders.

This chapter examines the considerations weighed by armed actors in responding to civilian demands in three Colombian peace territories, where residents have engaged in civil resistance against armed violence and negotiated with armed actors to reduce such violence. It does so mainly on the basis of data from fieldwork, including interviews with former or current members of armed groups who operated in the areas under study, and other actors. We find that armed actors weighed political, security, economic and normative considerations when faced with civilian demands and that the armed actors’ relative dependence on civilians regarding these four aspects influenced these actors’ responses.

This chapter examines the delicate balance achieved by apex courts in new democracies when dealing with impunity for rights violations during times of transitional justice. While international law has clearly rejected amnesties for past rights violations, domestic politics sometimes incorporate amnesties as part of larger peace settlements. This puts courts in the difficult situation of balancing the competing demands of law and politics. Courts have achieved equipoise in this situation by adopting substantive interpretations and procedural approaches that use international law’s rights-based language but without implementing international law’s restrictions on amnesties. In many cases, courts do this without acknowledging the necessarily pragmatic nature of their decisions. In fact, oftentimes courts find ways of avoiding having to make any substantive decision, effectively removing themselves from a dispute that could call into question their adherence to international legal norms that transcend politics. In doing so, they empower political actors to continue down the road toward negotiated peace settlements, while at the same time protecting the courts’ legitimacy as institutions uniquely situated to protect international human rights norms – including those they have effectively deemphasized in the process.