Impact Of Non-state Actors Research Articles

Turkish-Israeli Relations between 2002 and 2020: The Impact of Nonstate Actors on the Bilateral Ties

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the gradual decline in Turkish-Israeli relations between 2002 and 2020 by focusing on both states’ use of nonstate actors as proxies in pursuit of their competing strategic interests in the Middle East region. The article argues that the Islamization of Turkish foreign policy under the rule of the Justice and Development Party, as well as Turkey’s use of various Sunni Islamist nonstate actors in contradistinction to Israel and in the post-2003 Iraqi war period, coupled with Israel’s reliance on various Kurdish nonstate actors as proxies in tandem with its longstanding periphery doctrine, resulted in a decline in the bilateral relations.

The government’s symbiotic relations with interest groups and CSOS in Turkey: Pluralist or corporatist arrangements?

ABSTRACT On June 2020, the Turkish government passed a bill to establish multiple bars in the three major cities, Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir, claiming to democratize bar associations. Opposition parties objected because they predicted that ‘splitting’ bar associations would divide secular institutions along political lines and diminish their role as human rights observers. This raises the question of whether a plurality of interest groups and civil society organizations fosters democracy. Based on previous experience of the government’s relationships with the business sector, trade unions, and civil society organizations, this study mainly asserts that although the number and impact of non-state actors has increased since the 2000s, suggesting pluralist politics, the AKP government has formed corporatist arrangements with ideologically close organizations, labelled as ‘domestic and national’, which also symbolizes a discursive switch from Islamism to populist Turkish nationalism. This symbiotic relationship creates a win-win situation for the government to gain regimented support for its Islamist-nationalist policies and retain power while the organizations benefit from greater access to economic and political resources.

The Impact of Non-State Actors on World Politics: A Challenge to Nation-States

The Impact of Non-State Actors on World Politics: A Challenge to Nation-States

Lex PPPs as a source of regulation of cross-border relations in the sphere of public-private partnership and the role of international organizations in formation of Lex PPPs

Modern international and cross-border relations in the sphere of public-private partnership (PPP) undergo transformations caused by globalization processes, which leads to the amendments in their legal regulation. The impact of non-state actors increases. Although the toolset for influencing cross-border relations in the sphere of PPP retains its legal core, it is being extended by the rules established by non-state actors outside the international and national legal systems, and carry no legal weight. For PPP as a form of interaction between the state and private investment and business structures, such transformations are particularly noticeable and require precise legal qualification. The scientific novelty of this research consists in providing definition in the international legal doctrine to Lex PPPs as the regulator of cross-border relations in the sphere of public-private partnership. Based on the dialectical, logical, and formal-legal methods, assessment is given to the role of international organizations in the formation of Lex PPPs. In conclusion, the author clarifies the role of Lex PPPs within the system of regulators of public-private partnership, namely that it should not expel the legal regulation of cross-border relations in the sphere of public-private partnership; as well as offers to seek for the new forms of correlation between international law and Lex PPPs and their consolidation through the international legal regulation of public-private partnership.

A HUMANE LEGAL RESPONSE TO CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES ON THE USE OF FORCE POSED BY NON-STATE THREATS AND POSSIBLE MISUSES OF MILITARY NECESSITY

Trabalho enviado em 13 de abril de 2016. Aceito em 13 de abril de 2016. DOI: 10.12957/rqi.2016.22449 Abstract Giving preeminence to military interests over humanitarian considerations in international law may encourage attacks that violate the jus ad bellum because the generation of an armed attack will entitle targeting individuals in order to further the goals of entities carrying out the attacks. If this happens, individuals will be treated as means, and their human dignity will be violated. Thus, attacks on life in the mentioned circumstances violate the foundational value of both human rights and humanitarian law norms. Therefore, in order to discourage resorting to war and tweaking the law, depriving humanitarian guarantees of their effectiveness, a prevalent human rights law approach that acknowledges the arbitrariness and ensuing unlawfulness in those conducts is necessary. International Humanitarian Law can also be understood as violated, but even if it is not considered to be breached, an autonomous understanding of human rights law not subject to IHL is possible. Apart from the previous concerns, there is the issue of non-state uses of force. A State-centered conception of international law is inadequate to answer to reality and protect international legal goods. This is felt in jus ad bellum and jus in bello , because the impact of non-state actors cannot be dealt with properly in its light. In this regard, there are problems concerning the possibility of resorting to self-defense against non-state armed groups located in the territory of another State or in the regulation of armed conflicts in which non-state actors participate. Some of these challenges can be met with existing norms although there are gaps that call for regulation de lege ferenda. Keywords: human dignity; right to life; jus ad bellum; jus in bello, non-state actors

Transnational Actors and Great Powers during Order Transition

This article rests on the assumption of the “complexity, messiness, power relations, and contested character of the contemporary dualistic system,” which comprises great powers and “superimposed, functionally differentiated global subsystems of world society” ([Cohen 2012][1]:5). The article argues that this framework is being shaped by the current transition of global order. In turn, this raises the question how the state-led negotiation of today's order transition can be understood against the backdrop of a post-Westphalian environment. The article challenges the widespread argument pertaining to the “autonomy of transnational actors” by suggesting that the influence of nonstate actors is dependent on a particular institutional context in which the key political questions framing a social order are settled. Whereas research on international institutions and their design simply assumes that this is the case, here it is argued that unless these framing patterns are agreed upon by major powers, the respective order and its elements, that is, institutions and regimes, remain contested or deadlocked. When this happens, the political impact of non-state actors is largely neutralized or strongly weakened and their effective autonomy from great powers is minimized. [1]: #ref-16

Rebuilding communities after conflict: the role of non-state actors in the Rwenzori region, Uganda

The article looks at humanitarian interventions by non-state actors (NSAs) during and after the ADF insurgency, an intra-state conflict, in post-independence Uganda. It examines why the ADF insurgency in the Rwenzori region received little publicity and national and international humanitarian assistance. It explains why government prioritised restoration of security and legitimate state control but paid less attention to humanitarian intervention and post-conflict rebuilding of communities affected by conflict. The article further explains why NSAs have increasingly intervened in Uganda’s conflict situations. It assesses the impact of NSAs during and after conflict, their downside, and suggests reforms that are necessary for their effective performance.

EXPLORADORES, MISSIONÁRIOS, CIENTISTAS E A ABERTURA DO AMAZONAS

Partindo de análises históricas já realizadas, e da consulta de fontes primárias, o presente artigo pretende narrar a história do processo de abertura do rio Amazonas ao comércio e navegação internacionais. É explorada a hipótese de que em uma medida significativa esse processo se deu pela influência de atores transnacionais, capazes de promover a adoção de uma política até então majoritariamente rejeitada pelos estadistas brasileiros. De acordo com as conclusões obtidas, essa hipótese se confirma. Os tópicos explorados neste texto pretendem trazer luz para o estudo da história da política externa brasileira, o impacto de atores não-estatais sobre esta, além de políticas governamentais atuais concernentes à internacionalização da Região Amazônica.

Nonstate Actors in the Global Climate Regime

This paper, written for a forthcoming volume on climate change, provides a positive analysis of the roles and impact of non-state actors (NGOs) in the global climate change regime. It first identifies some of the major actors and distinguishes between two main types of nonstate actors: NGOs and epistemic or expert/scientific communities. Special attention is given to a uniquely important scientific, though not purely nongovernmental, body: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We then describe and analyze the activities of nonstate actors, examine their influence on current international responses to global climate change, and assess the significance of their current prominence for theories of international cooperation.

Conference Report – “From Government to Governance? The Growing Impact of Non-State Actors on the International and European Legal System” - 6th ASIL / NVIR / T.M.C. Asser Institute Joint Conference in The Hague, 3 -5 July 2003

This year's 6th Joint Conference held by the American and Dutch Societies of International Law and organised by the T.M.C. Asser Institute in The Hague focused on the increasing importance of the role of non-state actors in international law and at the same time provided an opportunity for American and European lawyers to address recent differences between the U.S. and Europe, e.g. on the use of force in Iraq. Consequently one of the three major issues of the conference was the response to international terrorism, while other issues included the role of international organizations as well as transnational corporations in international law.

The Impact of Non-State Actors on World Politics: A Challenge to Nation-States

Principal actors of the world politics are nation-states, but they are not the only actors. The international system consists of nation-states, international organizations, and private actors. Even though thousands of international organizations were established during the post-World War II era, they were underestimated by students of international relations. The increasing number of international organizations is parallel to the increasing levels of economic, political, social and cultural transactions between individuals, societies and states. The growth of so many kinds of non-state actors challenges and even weakens the “state-centric” concept of international politics and replaces it with a “transnational ” system in which relationships are more complex. These organizations changed the international environment (Miller, 1994). The proliferation of non-state actors has recently led some observers of international relations to conclude that states are declining in importance and that non-state actors are gaining status and influence. New theories of international relations such as the “complex interdependence” of Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye (1989) were formed in order to explain new developments. Kegley and Wittkoph (1995) accurately point out that “as the world grown