<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Paid Content &#8211; Kapok Tree Diplomacy</title>
	<atom:link href="https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/category/paid-content/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress</link>
	<description>Exploring the conduct of international relations and the ideals of democracy &#38; individual liberty in the context of the Christian worldview.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2023 16:25:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3</generator>
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">44605809</site>	<item>
		<title>China&#8217;s Assertion of Sovereign Authority in the Global Commons and the Escalation of Legal Warfare in the Arctic</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/chinas-assertion-of-sovereign-authority-in-the-global-commons-and-the-escalation-of-legal-warfare-in-the-arctic/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/chinas-assertion-of-sovereign-authority-in-the-global-commons-and-the-escalation-of-legal-warfare-in-the-arctic/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 15:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl. Political Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic Circle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic CounciI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arctic militarization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arctic state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[asymmetric warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNOOC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diaoyu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drilling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global commons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global prestige]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greenland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hydrocarbon deposits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iceland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indisputable sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Maritime Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[joint development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Li Zhenfu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Malacca Straits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maritime shipping industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[melting ice caps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[militarization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-Arctic state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Northwest Passage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Norway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[offensive realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oil demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People’s Liberation Army]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polar ice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[psychological warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional hegemony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereign authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial claims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transpolar sea route]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Convention on the Law of the Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNCLOS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[undiscovered oil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unrestricted warfare]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=659</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#8220;China’s Assertion of Sovereign Authority in the Global Commons and the Escalation of Legal Warfare in the Arctic&#8221; by Jeff Dwiggins © Kapok Tree Diplomacy. June 2013. All rights reserved.]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/chinas-assertion-of-sovereign-authority-in-the-global-commons-and-the-escalation-of-legal-warfare-in-the-arctic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">659</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Domestic Proliferation of Drones and their Challenges to American Democratic Values, Civil Liberties, Local Law Enforcement and National Security</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/532/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/532/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 00:37:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Natl. Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aerial surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AeroVironment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brennan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California v. Ciraolo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cartels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Certificates of Authorizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[checks and balances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COAs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Homeland Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DHS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drone strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drone surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drone wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[due process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical decision making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extra-judicial killings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Aviation Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military capabilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miniature UAV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Predator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remotely piloted aircraft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Secure Border Initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ShadowHawk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Super Bowl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surgical strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Switchblade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UAVs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unlawful surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unmanned aerial vehicles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable search and seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wasp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yemen]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=532</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In order to deter and defeat the increasingly violent and dangerous threats that challenge our borders, national security strategists must employ a flexible, forceful and effective array of intelligence gathering and counterterrorism tools that enable America’s defenders to guarantee the safety and security of the nation.  Domestic unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and drones are increasingly important for patrolling the 1,951 mile border between the U.S. and Mexico as well as for domestic law enforcement and homeland security purposes.  But are domestic drones threatening to violate many of America’s civil liberties and privacy rights while circumventing proper oversight, institutional checks and balances, and the rule of law?

Purpose Statement and Hypothesis

The purpose of this qualitative study is to examine the proliferation of domestic UAVs and their current and future law enforcement applications in context to America’s constitutional values and the increasingly blurred line between civilian and military roles in homeland security. The central hypothesis is that UAV technology is rapidly undermining the ethical framework within the national and homeland security decision-making process  while putting the nation’s civil liberties at risk and opening the door for a significant security and ethical disaster.  ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/532/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">532</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Engaging the Dragon Through Peaceful Deterrence: Japan’s Need to Recalibrate Its Strategy of Accommodation with China</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[A2/AD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accommodation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[active defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[APEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arc of Freedom and Prosperity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Article 9]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASEAN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asia-Pacific]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balance of threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bandwagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Beijing Consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bilateral trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bretton Woods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charter of the United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coast guard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective self defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective struggle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communist Party of China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concert of democracies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Confucian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterbalancing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defensive realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diplomacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dispute settlement mechanisms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dynamic deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[East Asian Summit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic coercion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Direct Investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global commons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grand strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hypothesis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICJ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Court of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Monetary Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Japan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maritime incident]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maritime Self-Defense Forces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marxism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[means]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multilateral]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual benefit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual nonaggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual noninterference in internal affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual respect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[North Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[official development assistance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[one China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paracels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People’s Republic of China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power trajectory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[provocative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rebalance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reciprocal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistribution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right of self defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rising power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sansha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security dilemma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senkakus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shanghai Cooperation Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soft power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South China Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spratlys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun Tzu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taiwan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Three Non-Nuclear Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tibet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.-Japan Alliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Convention on the Law of the Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNCLOS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universal values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vietnam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ways]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wen Jiabao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Trade Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTO]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=408</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[For the past ten years China has gradually asserted itself in the South China Sea as it has re-risen to major power status within the tenets of the Beijing Consensus and the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.   Meanwhile, Japan waited until 2006 to launch its “Arc of Freedom and Prosperity” grand strategy for counterbalancing China and reasserting itself in the Asia Pacific.  There are profound differences between the two strategies in terms of the values they espouse as well as their ends, ways, means for achieving the national interests. 

Japan’s strategy towards China has been primarily one of accommodation and engagement, but China has taken advantage of Japan’s polite acquiescence to their power trajectory.  Territorial disputes over the Spratlys, Paracels and now the Senkakus, combined with China’s threats of economic coercion, threaten regional stability as Japan reaches out to like-minded Asia-Pacific states through defense, diplomacy and development alliances.  
 
Purpose Statement and Hypothesis

The purpose of the essay is to examine the key differences between Japan and China’s grand strategies, especially the values that guide their strategies and national interests, and the capabilities, resources and alliances required to execute the strategies, challenges for implementation, likelihood of success, and the implications for long-term peace and stability that depend on which strategy ultimately prevails.  The study aims to fill a gap in the literature that fails to fully analyze and compare the competing universal values espoused by each grand strategy and how these values could shape the emerging balance of power in the Asia-Pacific.

The central hypothesis is that in order to avoid Chinese domination of its regional sphere of influence, Japan must modify its strategy of accommodation and engagement to one of “peaceful deterrence” based upon an enhanced security posture that is values-based, multilateral in nature and regionally structured as a concert of democracies.  ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">408</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blind Man’s Bluff: Kazakhstan’s Mirage of Compliance with International Obligations to Uphold the Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Assembly and Association</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adil Soz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ar.Rukh.Khak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arrests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Astana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Azat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[censorship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Committee to Protect Journalists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copenhagen Document]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[derogated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dissent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ESC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedo House]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[good faith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Helsinki Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[honor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICCPR General Comment No. 34]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal assemblies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ILO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Labor Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international standards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakhstan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KIBHRRL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Mass Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Human Rights Action Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nazarayev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nur Otan party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obligations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[observer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODIHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pacta sunt servanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[participant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[permission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political pluralism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Nursultan Nazarbayev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ramazan Yesergepov]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reporters Without Borders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative on Freedom of the Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Respublika]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Siracusa Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spontaneous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[think tanks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UDHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Economic and Social Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN treaties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Periodic Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unregistered organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UPR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vienna Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yevgeniy Zhovtis]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=396</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Leveraging billions of dollars of oil, gas and mineral reserves while avoiding major inter-ethnic conflict, Kazakhstan has become the most powerful and prosperous of all Central Asian states under the savvy and astute leadership of President Nursultan Nazarbayev and the first to chair the prestigious 56-member Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2010 (Dave, 250). Despite Kazakhstan’s impressive political and economic trajectory, the state has failed to consistently recognize and secure many important civil and political rights for its citizens that are enshrined in international human rights treaties.  

The rights to the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association may be considered cornerstones of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the OSCE Copenhagen Document, and the OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly which help to guarantee and safeguard democracy, common societal interests, and the rule of law (Kz-OSCE 4). The two rights are complementary with a violation of one often violating the other. This essay seeks to answer the following question: To what extent do Kazakhstan’s excessive restrictions on the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association fail to meet its obligations undertaken in accordance with the ICCPR, the OSCE Copenhagen Document, and OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly? This essay will limit its coverage to the 2007 – 2011 timeframe. ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">396</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine Is Incompatible with the Principles of National Sovereignty and Domestic Jurisdiction Found in International Law</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/why-the-responsibility-to-protect-r2p-doctrine-is-incompatible-with-the-principles-of-national-sovereignty-and-domestic-jurisdiction-found-in-international-law/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/why-the-responsibility-to-protect-r2p-doctrine-is-incompatible-with-the-principles-of-national-sovereignty-and-domestic-jurisdiction-found-in-international-law/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Christian Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Article 2(4)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customary norm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Darfur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[erga omnes obligations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failed states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fragile states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gareth Evans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humanitarian catastrophes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humanitarian intervention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICISS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international non-governmental associations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus cogens norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[just cause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kofi Annan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[last resort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass atrocities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military intervention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obligation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political independence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political will]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proportional means]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R2P]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonable prospects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[responsibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Responsibility to Protect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right intention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[serious harm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sudan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UDHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Charter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Security Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unwilling or unable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Federalist Movement]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=390</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In the aftermath of unresponsive and slow reactions by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to serious humanitarian catastrophes in Kosovo, Bosnia, Rwanda and Somalia, the British Foreign Office and a Canadian independent commission submitted proposals to UN Secretary General (UNSG) Kofi Annan, in 1999 and 2001 respectively, arguing for a limited right of military and humanitarian intervention under certain conditions to protect civilians from mass atrocities (Byers 104). Over the past ten years, an emerging norm and set of principles known as the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has surfaced based upon the idea that “sovereignty is not a prerogative but a responsibility” (Axworthy qtd. in Byers 106).
   
But is R2P intervention legal? Does it violate national sovereignty and domestic jurisdiction? Does it lead to selective authorizations for intervention by the UNSC? Could it lead to inappropriate and unnecessary humanitarian interventions that do more harm than good? This research paper seeks to answer the above questions in the affirmative and establish the principle that R2P is illegal based on the basic principles of national sovereignty and domestic jurisdiction found in international law. ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/why-the-responsibility-to-protect-r2p-doctrine-is-incompatible-with-the-principles-of-national-sovereignty-and-domestic-jurisdiction-found-in-international-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">390</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>International and Regional Mechanisms for Holding Human Rights Offenders Accountable</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-and-regional-mechanisms-for-holding-human-rights-offenders-accountable/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-and-regional-mechanisms-for-holding-human-rights-offenders-accountable/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 23:40:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1235 procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1503 procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[armed conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CEDAW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charter-based]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commission on the Status of Women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ECHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Court of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extra-territorial jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fact finding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[female genital mutilation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General Comments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genocide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hybrid justice mechanisms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IACHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IACtHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICCPR Human Rights Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inter-American Commission on Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inter-American Court of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Court of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international humanitarian law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kofi Annan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[margin of appreciation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nulla poena sine lege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nullum crimen sine lege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization of American States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post-conflict reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanctions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[special procedures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Special Rapporteurs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treaty-based]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth commissions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Security Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victor’s justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violations]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=368</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[United Nations charter-based and treaty-based bodies and regional human rights, commissions, courts and councils carry the responsibility for holding both states and individuals accountable for human rights violations. The efficacy of enforcement mechanisms, or lack thereof, and the reluctance of states to part with sovereignty often serve as obstacles to the realization of effective accountability. This essay will examine the different options for holding individuals and states accountable, the processes for obtaining justice, and the remedies, sanctions and enforcement mechanisms that may result. 

The essay will explore the effectiveness, strengths and weaknesses of the processes and punishments of the UN Charter and treaty-based bodies and regional institutions. The essay will conclude that the determination of which institution is more effective depends on a variety of factors to include the nature of the violation, the type of entity being held accountable – state or individual, the political will of the states involved, the jurisdiction and enforcement options available, the sufficiency and maturity of the regional, legal infrastructure, regional perceptions of impartiality and legitimacy, and the financial and legal resources at the disposal of the judicial institution. 
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-and-regional-mechanisms-for-holding-human-rights-offenders-accountable/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">368</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Key Differences between First and Second Generation Human Rights</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-critical-differences-between-first-and-second-generation-human-rights/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-critical-differences-between-first-and-second-generation-human-rights/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[a priori]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aspirational]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coercion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective good]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Convention Against Torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enlightenment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entitlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Court of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom from torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government of South Africa vs. Grootboom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICCPR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICESCR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inalienable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intensity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intentional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inter-American Court of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Bill of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus cogens peremptory norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justiciability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Landau Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lex ferenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberty rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maastricht Guidelines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negative rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[positive rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[progressive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[punishment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right to life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right to work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights to goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights vs. resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[severe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social and Cultural Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[socio-economic rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Special Rapporteurs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treaties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vienna Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=361</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The recognition of individual human rights under international law took on a “formal and authoritative expression” following the end of World War II when the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 (Steiner, Alston &#038; Goodman (SAG) 134). The UNDHR was designed to “take the form of a declaration – that is, a recommendation by the General Assembly to Member States that would exert a moral and political influence on states rather than constitute a legally binding document” (SAG 135). 

	Following approval of the UDHR, the UN Commission, General Assembly and Third Committee began work on a more “detailed and comprehensive” expression of human rights that emerged in the form of “two principal treaties – The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)” which were both approved in 1966 and both entered into force in 1976 through the required number of ratifications (SAG 136). The ICCPR and ICESCR were designed to be more legally binding than the UDHR. Collectively, these three documents are often referred to as the ‘International Bill of Human Rights’ (SAG 133). 
	
While the ICCPR and ICESCR are said by the Vienna Conference (1993) to be “universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated” (263), there is not universal agreement that the two sets of rights are in fact universal or that they are of equal political and moral weight. The complete set of rights was split into two documents for a reason. With the advent of the Cold War, ideological differences began to emerge over commitments to “first generation” civil and political rights (CPRs) and “second generation” economic and social rights (ESRs) (SAG 136). This bifurcation of rights is often challenged by many as an unfair hierarchical categorization, while others may point to CPRs as being an attempt at Western “ideological imperialism” (SAG 140-141). 

This essay will explore the critical differences between the two documents as well as some similarities. Moreover, the essay will examine the content, application and enforcement characteristics of each document, challenges to enforcement, the nature of each set of rights and their critical differences, and conclude with the assertion that CPRs are more important. 
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-critical-differences-between-first-and-second-generation-human-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">361</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>NATO’s Role and Relevance in Post-Conflict Reconstruction And Challenges in Implementing the Comprehensive Approach</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/natos-role-and-relevance-in-post-conflict-reconstruction-and-challenges-in-implementing-the-comprehensive-approach/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/natos-role-and-relevance-in-post-conflict-reconstruction-and-challenges-in-implementing-the-comprehensive-approach/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:04:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prevent/Contain Intl. Conflicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghan National Army]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghan National Police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghan Transitional Authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al-Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ANA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ANP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bonn Peace Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosnia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[burden sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capacity building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CERP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil-military operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cold war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commander’s Emergency Response Program]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comprehensive approach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[containment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counter-insurgency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counter-narcotics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterterrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dayton Accords]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defensive alliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Monetary Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Security Assistance Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intervention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPTF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISAF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kosovo Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military allaince]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multilateral]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO-ISAF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-Article 5 missions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[North Atlantic Treaty Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OEF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Operation Enduring Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post conflict reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Karzai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Provincial Development Councils]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Riga Summit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Gates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SFOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soft power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stabilization Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Concept]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taliban]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribal leaders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Agency of International Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN High Commission for Refugees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Interim Mission in Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN International Police Task Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNMIK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USAID]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Bank]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=352</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) purpose has evolved from one “resolved to unite their [members’] efforts for collective defense and for the preservation of peace and security” (NATO “Treaty”), to one of collective security responding to “out of area” conflicts, the organization has become far more than a military alliance. These conflicts have provided NATO the opportunity to engage in both military and non-military aspects of post-conflict reconstruction (PCR) in robust peacebuilding operations aimed not only at stabilizing the security situation, but rebuilding the “socioeconomic framework of society … [to include] the framework of governance and rule of law” (Hamre &#038; Sullivan 89).
 
NATO’s ‘comprehensive approach’ to link up military and civilian resources has encountered numerous practical and political challenges, not the least of which has been a lack of adequate resources and uneven burden-sharing amongst its members. “Stated another way, NATO is an alliance … caught up in a myriad of contentious and costly operations that prevent it from appropriately posturing for the 21st century security environment” (Warren 8). 

This paper will explore NATO’s challenges in coordinating the military and civilian aspects of PCR and answer the following questions: Is NATO effective at executing complex civil-military interventions, and secondly, has the alliance found its relevance and purpose?

{The posts, views and opinions expressed in this paper are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces}]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/natos-role-and-relevance-in-post-conflict-reconstruction-and-challenges-in-implementing-the-comprehensive-approach/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">352</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Challenges Facing Outside Actors in Balancing Punitive and Reconciliatory Measures in Nation/State-Building and the Optimum Division of Labor to Overcome Them</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:43:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Conflict Reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acquis communautaire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[black market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosnia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosnian War Crimes Chamber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brain drain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[building capacity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capacity building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ceasefires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil society development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cold war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common national identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidence-building measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core pillars of societal reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dayton Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DD&R]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demobilizing combatants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development projects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disarmament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disarming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[division of labor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic sanctions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethnic instability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU accession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EULEX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failed states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fragile states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gbagbo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Haiti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[host state consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humanitarian assistance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDPs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impartiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internally displaced persons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legitimacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loans and grants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mandate of neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military coup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[militias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minimum use of force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MNFs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MONUSCO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multinational forces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation/state-building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negotiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-governmental organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OECD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office of the High Representative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organized crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peacekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political will]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post conflict reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power-sharing agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[punitive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reconciliation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reconciliatory measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reparations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resettlement of refugees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rules of engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scarce resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[socioeconomic framework]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Somalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Timor-Leste]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traditional peacekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals partial amnesties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Assistance Mission to Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Operation in Somalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNAMIR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNOSOM II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victor’s justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war criminals]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=327</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[External actors such as international organizations (IOs), regional alliances (RAs), individual states, multinational forces (MNFs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have increasingly intervened in fragile and failed states in postconflict scenarios following the end of the Cold War. The nation/state-building processes (NSB) implemented by these actors to rebuild the “socioeconomic framework of society … [to include] the framework of governance and rule of law” (Hamre &#038; Sullivan 89) attempt to strike a reasonable balance between punitive and reconciliatory measures in their efforts to rehabilitate security, political, economic and social institutions as well as establish a sense of common identity among citizens (Bercovitch &#038; Jackson 175). 

This essay will analyze NSB processes around the core pillars of societal reform necessary to prevent a return to violence in context to the following points of emphasis:

(1)	 What types of challenges do the above-listed outside actors face in striking the balance between punitive and reconciliatory measures in NSB processes?

(2)	What division of labor among IOs, RAs, states and NGOs is likely to prove most effective in meeting such challenges in the future and why? 

The posts, views and opinions expressed on this site are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces. ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">327</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Zero Problems &#8211; Enhancing Security and Preventing Conflict in Turkey’s Evolving Partnerships with the European Union, United States, Middle East, Russia and Eurasia</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/zero-problems-enhancing-security-and-preventing-conflict-in-turkeys-evolving-partnerships-with-the-european-union-united-states-middle-east-russia-and-eurasia/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/zero-problems-enhancing-security-and-preventing-conflict-in-turkeys-evolving-partnerships-with-the-european-union-united-states-middle-east-russia-and-eurasia/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prevent/Contain Intl. Conflicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Africa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ahmet Davutoğlu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AKP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ankara Protocol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Annan Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Armenia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Armenian-Turkish relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Azerbaijan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Balkans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blue Stream II pipeline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cagaptay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Caucasus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Common Security and Defense Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cooperation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterbalancing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CSDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cyprus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Davutoglu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EMFTA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Erdogan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU accession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Customs Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU subsidies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Commission on Enlargement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Defense Agency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europeanization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genocide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greece]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greek Cypriots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[honest broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice and Development Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kurdistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kurdistan Workers Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kurds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mavi Marmara flotilla]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minsk Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mustafa Kemal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nabucco pipeline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nagorno-Karabakh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ottoman Empire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Partnership for Peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PKK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[preferred partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prime Minister Erdogan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pro-Western]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reconciliation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rhythmic diplomacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Samsun-Ceyhan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soft power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic security partnerships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sudan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Turkish Cypriots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[two-faced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Economic Forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zero problems]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=290</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Turkey’s security partnerships with Europe, NATO and the United States have played an important role in its foreign policy decisions since the 1950’s as a counter to Russia during the Cold War (CountryWatch, “Political History”). Founded on the principles of “secularism, strong nationalism, statism, and to a degree, western orientation” by Mustafa Kemal after the collapse of the 600-year old Ottoman Empire (U.S. State Dept., Background Note), Turkey is uniquely positioned at the crossroads and nexus of “four areas of growing strategic importance in the post-Cold War era” (Larrabee 3): the Balkans and Europe, the Middle East and Persian Gulf region, and the Caucasus/Central Asia region. 
 
With the end of the Cold War and the onset of two Persian Gulf Wars, Turkey’s interests and strategic alliances began to markedly shift their trajectories (Larrabee 6-9). This paper will explore Turkey's recent modifications of its strategic security partnerships from the perspectives of key states within each of its regional spheres of influence in a context of conflict prevention. Section One will review the Balkans and European perspective; in Section Two the Middle East; Eurasia and the Caucasus in Section Three with a special slant on Russia; and in Section Four the United States. Section Five will review Turkey’s internal domestic issues to include the Kurdish challenge, political trends, global aspirations and some interesting comparisons with China. The paper will conclude with Section Six and some recommended conflict prevention strategies to counterbalance Turkey’s various threats. 

The views and opinions expressed in this paper are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces. 
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/zero-problems-enhancing-security-and-preventing-conflict-in-turkeys-evolving-partnerships-with-the-european-union-united-states-middle-east-russia-and-eurasia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">290</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
