Modern State System Research Articles

Decentralization of Nigeria Air Power: Army’s Drone (UCAV) Reconnaissance, Strike/Fire Complex Combat System

Military power has been a centerpiece in the negotiation of state formation and geopolitical stability. The business of the arm forces of nations has been from a historical perspective anchored on the defense of its sovereign territorial integrity, and the advancement of national interest afar. The advent of the modern state system has seen a reshape in the way and manner with which war is waged. Central to the changes in the conduct of war is the revolution in military affairs. The introduction of aviation resources to the conduct of war in the 20s speaks volumes of the ever-changing strategic environment. The weapon system of the first and second world wars will no doubt be unimaginable to the strategists of the renaissance era. The age of reason has thus passed different phases; the sky has steadily remain a significant part of the domain of warfare. However, the nature of warfare has not remained stagnant. Airpower, which is the weaponization of aviation resources have passed through various phases. Airpower no doubt emerged in the war toolkit of the symmetric threat environment of the twenties, but its demand in the asymmetric threat environment of the 21st century has led to more innovation in capabilities, nature, and missions, and debate for a policy change in command and control. A debate, whose literatures were all-encompassing in the American discourses on strategy, capability, and operations. This article brings the debate on the changing role of airpower, and the need for more reliance on drones and decentralized command and control between the Airforce and the Army in the current threat environment, from a Nigerian perspective. As the battle against Boko Haram ranges, the need for arm overwatch and arm overmatch that aids maneuvering the battlefield and it gray zones to defeat the terrorism, and guerrilla insurgent groups becomes critical in shaping the northeast theater in the image of the Nigerian positive peace. Therefore, the need for drone ISR and fire/strike capabilities to become organic to surface forces, in tonaid the encirclement and obliteration of enemy through observation, orientation, decision, and actions line of operation, which is the critical role of effective battlefield operating system, a mechanism the theater commander employs combat power towards the destruction or exhuastion of the enemy. It should be noted that this article relied on secondary data collection.

Inter-religious Conflict, Translation, and the Usage of the Early Modern Notion of ‘Religion’ from the Fall of Constantinople to the Westphalian Peace Treaty in 1648

Abstract The article attempts to show that the modern notion of ‘religion’ is a construction that emerged in the context of inter-religious encounters following the fall of Constantinople and especially in the years around the Reformation. Hereby, the article argues that the modern notion of ‘religion’ emerged earlier than found by most previous studies, and that it was used in the legislation of the new Protestant states as well as in the modern (Westphalian) state-system, both of which it has been a part of ever since. The notion of ‘religion’ is, thus, not a scholarly invention (J.Z. Smith) or tied to colonialism (Timothy Fitzgerald) but rather a product of complex historical processes in which religious conflicts and the attempt to overcome these played a key role.

International refugee protection and the primary institutions of international society

AbstractRefugees are often considered as a source of disorder if not fundamental threat to international society. In contrast, and drawing from an English School approach, this article argues that the figure of the refugee is foundational to the constitution of both modern international society and its agent, the sovereign territorial state; hence refugee protection represents a primary institution of international society. Starting with conceptual and methodological considerations for studying primary institutions, the article then highlights the longstanding and widespread state practice of granting asylum. It is shown that on the one hand, the figure of the refugee serves to consolidate and naturalise the nation/state/territory trinity underpinning the modern state system; and on the other hand, protecting refugees plays a central role in the construction of statist self-identities as liberal, humanitarian, and altruistic agents. The last section of the article turns to the politics of contestation of refugee protection, examining domestic, regional, and international reactions to ‘anti-refugee’ policies in the United States, Hungary, and Australia. The considerable amount of criticism generated by these restrictive policies, it is argued, evidence the enduring importance and relevance of refugee protection in (and for) international society.

Muslim State in a World of Nation-State

Muslim views on the polity represent the paradigmatic understandings of how Muslims relate citizenry, authority, territoriality, and sovereignty to the overarching influence of the Western nation-state system. For instance, the meaning of citizenry in the modern state system was adopted by several Muslim societies during the decolonisation period. Faith or submission to the will of Allah was the main criterion to become part of the group (usually referred to as the ummah). However, orientalists regarded ummah as a synonym for tribe, while Arab linguists insisted on a religious connotation. Authority, on the other hand, is ultimately enshrined in the personhood of the Prophetﷺ who is the spiritual leader, executor, legislator, and judicial interpreter of Allah’s message. Since in reality the Prophetﷺ is no longer existing, leadership is bestowed on the subsequent followers, and sometimes the ummah may possess leadership status through a social contract between the ruler and the ruled. The manifestation of operationalised authority needs a political space, domain, or place, which is attainable via the notion of territoriality. This is loosely conceptualised as an ummah that has geographical aspects, cultural traits, and a lingua franca. In the 8th century, jurists divided Muslim territoriality into two analytical terms, the abode of Islam (dār al-Islam) and the abode of war/the enemy (dār al-Harb), while the Shia version of abodes rests in the Qur’ānic dichotomy of “oppressed–oppressor.” The last concept pertains to sovereignty (hakimiyyah), commonly understood as “the will of God” and advanced by Islamists in the 20th century. In medieval times, it was understood as the promotion of public welfare envisaged in Sharī’ah, while in modern times, Islamic modernists argued that Islamists wrongfully understood sovereignty and that the root word used in the Qur’ān meant “to govern.” Nowadays, the assertion that symbolises Allah’s sovereignty can be found in some modern Muslim states.

THE CIVIL WAR OF (1918-1922) THE BEGINNING OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

The paper considers the peculiarities of forming of modern state and social system of the Russian Federation during the Civil war in Russia (1918-1922) that provide a basis for the state system of the modern Russian Federation. Their universal and special features are revealed. The author analyses the relationship of American and Soviet model of constitutional federalism. It was found that the content of the legislative work of the Soviet government in the mentioned period allows us to estimate it as the beginning of the constitutional development of the Russian state.

‘People without a State Also Must Live’: Kurds’ Experiences of Citizenship in the Middle East and the Netherlands

Through considering the historical and ongoing systematic oppression of Kurds in the Middle East, this paper seeks to interrogate the role of citizenship in relation to processes of inclusion and exclusion within nation states. By situating the concepts of citizenship and statelessness within their appropriate political context, this paper explores the extent to which citizenship regimes can be used to serve the interests of the state and undermine the interests of minority citizens. This is analysed through considering the framework of the modern state system, in which individuals are largely dependent on citizenship for access to rights. The severe implications of non-citizenship increase citizens’ dependency on states, increasing the capability of states to oppress minority citizens who are not considered to belong within the national community. Through navigating participants’ narratives of citizenship and statelessness, a nuanced understanding of the role of citizenship will challenge dominant assumptions

Critical Theory and its Educational Implications in Nepal

Critical theory is the output of a herd of German social theorists, first associated with the Institute for Social Research begun in Frankfurt Germany in 1923, and who later moved to and were influential in the US. Critical theory incorporates a wide range of approaches all focused on the idea of freeing people from the modern state and economic system – a concept known to critical theorists as emancipation. This paper aims to provide a concise introduction about the critical theory with its principal tenets and critiques along with philosophical root(s) and the research components. It also overviews the overall educational implications of critical theory in contrast to the other sociological theories in the field of educational research. Moreover, the paper provides insights into how researchers contextualize the critical theory in the educational landscape of Nepalese scenario.

ANALISIS YURIDIS CABANG PEMERINTAHAN KEEMPAT DALAM STRUKTUR KETATANEGARAAN DI INDONESIA

AbstractThe development of the modern state system is also followed by the establishment of new institutions as a support of the institutions that have been there before. The most significant event in the development and establishment of institutions is the new power branch, which is called by the experts in constitutional as an independent state commission. Independent state commission institution which, if seen from the character and the authority, the agency in some literature in American constitutional law is referred to as the fourth branch of power (The Fourth Branch of Government). Some things that make this institution called the fourth branch of government (The Fourth Branch of Government) is the fact that the agency, or commission or the state body run more than one function of government as well. The existence of a fourth branch of government (The Fourth Branch of Government) with the characteristics of state institutions whose authorities are quasi, combinations, as well as the accumulation of three existing government functions and make this institution to be difficult to identify in thought Trias Politica. The phenomenon of the rise of an institution with a new concept that has influenced the constitutional system in many countries.AbstrakPerkembangan sistem ketatanegaaran modern dikuti pula dengan terbentuknya lembaga-lembaga baru sebagai penunjang dari lembaga yang telah ada sebelumnya. Hal yang paling signifikan dalam perkembangan dan pembentukan institusi domokratis tersebut tidak lain adalah cabang kekuasaan baru yang biasa disebut oleh kalangan ahli tata negara sebagai komisi negara independen. Lembaga komisi negara independen yang jika dilihat dari sifat dan kewengannya, lembaga tersebut dalam beberapa literatur hukum tata negara di Amerika disebut sebagai cabang kekuasaan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Goverment). Beberapa hal yang membuat lembaga negara ini disebut sebagai cabang pemerintahan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Government) adalah fakta bahwa lembaga, atau komisi atau badan negara tersebut menjalankan lebih dari satu bahkan ketiga fungsi pemerintahan sekaligus. Eksistensi cabang pemerintahan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Government) dengan karakteristik lembaga negara yang kewenangannya yang bersifat kuasi, kombinasi, maupun akumulasi dari tiga fungsi pemerintahan yang ada dan menjadikan lembaga ini untuk sulit diidentifikasi dalam pemikiran Trias Politica. Fenomena munculnya sebuah lembaga dengan konsep baru tersebut telah ikut mempengaruhi sistem ketatanegaraan dibanyak negara.

A két világháború közti libanoni rendszer természetrajza

The reconfiguration of the Middle East after the First World War can be regarded as the first wave of Europeanization in the Middle East. The centuries-long imperial order that defined the region and originated from local factors were replaced by a European-type modern state system, in which mandate powers such as France and Great Britain established Western institutions with their secular ideology, administrative basis, and understanding of sovereignty. It was evident from the beginning, that the arbitrarily designated borders broke many wellestablished local compromises and subverted the delicate balance between different sects, religions, language groups, and nations. The case of Lebanon – as the most complex area concerning the ethnic and sectarian divisions – illustrates the fact that implementing a European style nationstate into a Middle Eastern environment met with resistance and these set of internal contradictions have been exerting influence on the political situation of the region ever since. Although the mandate system of the interwar period broke up and Lebanon gained independence after the Second World War, the original demands by local movements (e.g. establishing a Greater Syria) was not possible owing to the firm establishment of new borders after 1918. In practice, this meant that independence was materialized in a framework defined by France and Great Britain and this condition considerably limited the space of action both on the political and the social level.

Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism by Quinn Slobodian

Reviewed by: Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism by Quinn Slobodian Or Rosenboim Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism. By Quinn Slobodian. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018. Pp. x + 381. Cloth. $35.00. ISBN 978-0674979529. In recent years, the intellectual foundation of neoliberalism has attracted the attention of historians and economists. Scholars like Angus Burgin and Dotan Leshem have looked to the past to define the meaning of neoliberalism and outline its future trajectories. Quinn Slobodian has made a significant contribution to this growing body of scholarship with his remarkable study of neoliberalism in the twentieth century, Globalists. Slobodian's main thesis in the book is that neoliberalism sought to adapt the liberal market-based global vision to the reality of the modern states-system in the postimperial world. The book's dramatis personae are a group of economists centered on what Slobodian calls the "Geneva School," which included Friedrich Hayek, Wilhelm Röpke, Ludwig von Mises, Michael Heilperin, Lionel Robbins, Gottfried Haberler, and Frieder Roessler. Thus, Slobodian argues that scholars who seek to understand the rise and the meaning of neoliberalism should shift their gaze away from the English-speaking intellectual sphere to the German-speaking one. In this narrative, the Swiss city by the lake becomes a hub of intellectual, political, and economic exchanges between mostly Central European economists—many of them refugees—concerned with the future of liberty after empire. The appropriation of their ideas by American economists in Chicago or by international organizations like the World Trade [End Page 385] Organization came at a later stage. The origins of the neoliberal global worldview were anchored in Europe, and in particular in the political and economic legacy of the Habsburg Empire and fin-de-siècle Vienna. The book's meticulously researched narrative unfolds over seven chapters, each dedicated to a different aspect of the globalists' vision of renewed economic liberalism: from tariffs to federations, from constitutions to new international organizations, the globalists explored a wide range of means to adapt the state to their liberal idea of absolute property rights, wholly integrated world economy, and individual liberty. Writing in the shadow of totalitarianism and fascism, these neoliberals advocated setting constraints to both democracy and nationalism, but they did not wish to abolish the state. But their critique of the ideology of nationalism did not translate into a call to abolish all states or to establish a supranational political system (although some, like Hayek, were at one time federalists). Instead, they sought a structural adjustment that could embed the postimperial world order within an integrated, liberal international institutional design. For them, "order was not a steady state, but an adjustment, an often painful process of learning" (262). The market could not function on its own; the globalists' role was to fine tune its mechanisms and ensure its smooth operation on a global scale. Thus, Slobodian argues that neoliberalism "is less a theory of the market or of economics than of law and the state" (268). The main contribution of this original and compelling study is outlining a new context for assessing and understanding neoliberalism in which the state plays a major role. Politics and the law are now seen to be much more significant in constructing the neoliberal worldview than previously assumed. Slobodian shows how the protagonists of globalist neoliberalism envisioned a range of legal, institutional, and political tools to ensure the integration of the world economy and the preservation of the unequal global power relations after the decline of the European empires. The book is framed as a contextual intellectual history of the economists who constituted the Geneva School, but the contextualization is inevitably partial. Most obviously, the reader lacks a clear view of the political and intellectual opposition to the neoliberal vision. Who was Hayek arguing against? What were the alternative visions and plans of a global order available after 1945? If the core of neoliberalism is to be found in Central Europe, it would be valuable to situate the proposals of the globalist neoliberals within the horizon of European postwar politics. In this sense, for example, the wartime federalist vision of Hayek and Robbins...

PROBLEMS OF SOCIOLOGICAL AND LEGAL ANALYSIS TO DEPARTMENT JUDICIAL AND ITS EFFICIENCY

Problem setting. Justice is the attribute of democratic power in the legal state, it by a necessary function and plays a substantial role in the recreation of the real law. The modern legal proceeding is acknowledged effective, if characterized not only realization directly of legal tasks but also achievement of social aims. The social role of department judicial, especially in Ukraine which aims to enter to the circle of the democratic European countries, needs proofs concerning its ability to incarnate the ideas of justice, principles of right and legality in life. Recent research and publications analysis. The problem analysis of department judicial is founded the classics of legal sociology, O. Kholms, R. Pound, J. Karbon'e, N. Luhmann, Dz. Frank, M. Foucault, B. Kistyakovskiy, M. Korkunov, P. Novgorodcev, L. Petrazhickiy, B. Chicherin, P. Sorokin; and later developed modern scientists K.Llewellyn , V. Kudryavcev, V. Kazimirchuk, V. Selivanov, V. Lapaeva, I. Ruschenko, I. Marochkinim but other. Paper objective. The primary objective of this article is to analyse in a sociological-legal paradigm a department judicial not only as part of the modern state system but also as a social and legal institute, with his elements, lines, functions; to rotin that him the public setting is effective realization of legal proceedings and proceeding in social justice. Paper main body.The sociological analysis of department judicial allows to combine the doctrine of sociological jurisprudence, school of legal realism and institutional approach; to apply the analysis of the systems for the estimation of social connections of court with other organs of power and civil society; to probe efficiency of the Ukrainian court by concrete sociological researches. Important enough a problem became of exposure of level of sense of justice of judges and degree of influence of political elites, legal communication, experts on the real functioning of department judicial in Ukraine. Grounded problem of department judicial as a «social institute» on the basis of structure of social action, infrastructure, functions and public legitimation. Opening of social mechanism of department judicial is carried out by establishment of intercommunication between the actions of court and sense of justice and conduct of citizens which is the participant of judicial legal relations.A trust to the judicial system in Ukraine remains at low level. It was led to by results sociological research, conducted in 2018 year on the order of Center of Democracy and Supremacy of Right (1000 persons are polled). Every tenth from polled considers only, that operating judges answer the position; and suggest to enter more transparent procedure from the selection of new judges. Consequently, in the modern scientific co-ordinates of problem of judicial sociology it follows more expressly to differentiate: it is accordance of expectations of society to the actual results of activity of court; an estimation of justice is in the aspect of observance of principle of «equality of citizens before a law»; sociological estimation of stereotypes of conduct of judges; etc.Conclusions of the research. Social efficiency of court consists in ability on the basis of law and moral to settle legal conflicts, that arising up in society; to be the instrument of social control, guarantor of stability and law and order, what to lift the social value of Right.

Informal institutional change and the place of traditional justice in Sierra Leone’s post-war reconstruction

Engaging traditional authorities in post-conflict development of the rule of law is expected to preserve progressive elements of traditional dispute resolution while reforming the despotic practices of such authorities. However, beyond this widely-held expectation, the peacebuilding literature has so far failed to specify which traditional functions are susceptible to change and the mechanisms for informal institutional change. Based on qualitative fieldwork on traditional justice in Sierra Leone, this article argues that judicial roles which have emerged in response to weaknesses in the modern state system can be destabilized by post-conflict institutional reforms aimed at (re)building the rule of law. This is because the problem-solving needs which precipitated those informal judicial functions can be altered by an effective state system and the cost most likely to inhibit institutional change in this reconstruction context is particularistic to traditional authorities. However, preference for traditional methods and practices outside this endogenous relationship raises a fundamental question about socially-relevant justice which cannot be addressed by a functional state system and whose disruption incurs widely dispersed sociocultural costs.

Catholic Reform in Ireland in a European Context

456 Studies • volume 106 • number 424 Catholic Reform in Ireland in a European Context Tadhg Ó hAnnracháin While exceptionalism is rightly considered a particularly hazardous form of historical explanation, the religious evolution of Ireland during the early modern period can be considered anomalous in European terms.1 First, within the wider family of European Catholicism, Ireland was unusual in that the majority of the island’s inhabitants continued to identify themselves as members of the Church of Rome, although for practically the entirety of the period the monarch of Ireland was Protestant. The closest analogy to this situation was probably the Dutch Republic immediately following the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, when the inclusion of the Generality lands boosted the Catholic proportion of the Dutch population to between forty to fifty per cent. Elsewhere on the continent, however, Catholicism was the majority religion only in those areas where state power rested in Catholic hands, and often where that state power was highly aggressively deployed. Ireland represents a sharp contrast, therefore, with large areas of Scandinavia, most notably Norway, where little enthusiasm for an externally-imposed Reformation existed but where Catholicism nevertheless declined steeply in the face of state hostility. Even in polities such as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Hungary and, to a lesser extent France, where the monarchy was restricted in its capacity to deploy outright coercion to promote adherence to Catholicism, the Church of Rome benefited from active support and partisanship rather than, as in the case of Ireland, facing harassment, restriction and hostility. Ireland as a special case This continued disjunction in religion between monarch and subjects also rendered the island unusual within the wider history of the continent’s confessional states. The early modern European state system was founded on a union of throne and altar in which religious dissidence was not only seen as a deadly threat to the stability of the body politic, but ius reformandi came to be seen as one of the most highly prized attributes of state sovereignty Tadhg Ó hAnnracháin Studies • volume 106 • number 424 457 by European monarchs. Pious princes also conceived it as their duty to promote the mission of the (approved) Church in their dominions and could take heart that this activity both rendered the polity more pleasing to the Almighty, and thus less likely to provoke a divine chastisement, while also isolating and weakening a potential fifth column of religious dissidents who might be driven to make common cause with an external foe in the interests of their deviant beliefs. The advantages conferred by control over the state coercive apparatus and patronage were enormous and allowed monarchs to accomplish some extraordinary metamorphoses. In Austria and Bohemia, the Habsburgs transformed Catholicism from the church of a threatened minority to the accepted religion of the vast majority of the population, while the Elizabethan regime successfully transmuted the religious allegiance of the majority of the English population, although in a manner which stored up significant issues for her successors. Ireland was certainly not a unique case of state confessional failure. Philip II’s attempts to reconfigure both the political and religious governance of the Netherlands provoked a revolt which ultimately saw the Habsburgs lose control over the seven northern provinces of what became the Dutch Republic. Strong resonances can be seen between the Dutch and the Irish experiences in that it can be argued that an original a-confessional cause, in the Netherlands the defence of local autonomy,2 in Ireland resentment of the militaristic state-building wars of the later Tudors, eventually polarised into religious conflict. Where Ireland differed from the Netherlands, however, was the sheer longevity, indeed the institutionalised instability, of the confessional conflict. Eighty years of war in the Netherlands eventually gave the Habsburgs free rein in the southern provinces while in the north an unusually tolerant western European society developed. While religious antagonisms remained potent, they did not represent a mortal threat to the continued viability of the Republic. In Ireland, by contrast, confessional hostilities continued to have the potential to threaten the stability of the entire kingdom to the end of the eighteenth century and beyond. Within the more narrow confines of the Atlantic archipelago...

Process sociology, the English School, and postcolonialism – understanding ‘civilization’ and world politics: a reply to the critics

AbstractThis article responds to critics of Violence and Civilization in the Western States-Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2016). It provides a rejoinder to challenges to the attempted synthesis of process sociology and the English School analysis of international society. It rebuts the postcolonial contention that the process-sociological analysis of the impact of the European ‘civilizing process’ on the modern states-system is Eurocentric. The article explains how process sociology contributes to the postcolonial critique of ‘civilization’. It concludes by arguing that their combined strengths of the two perspectives can inform the comparative study of Western and non-Western ‘civilizing processes’ and support the development of a more ‘global IR’.

Nationalism and war for territory: from ‘divisible’ territories to inviolable homelands

How did the rise of nationalism affect patterns of interstate wars? The conventional wisdom in mainstream security studies tends to treat the rise of nationalism as a ‘force amplifier’ that allowed states to wage war on an unprecedented scale, leading to deadlier—and, consequently, less frequent—wars. By building on emerging interdisciplinary research on territory and territoriality, this essay suggests that there was a second mechanism—complementary to the ‘force amplifier’ logic—through which the rise of nationalism affected the patterns of interstate war: nationalism changed the ‘character’ of territories in the modern state system, which, in turn, transformed state preferences over their territorial belongings. Before the rise of nationalism, state elites viewed their territories more as ‘divisible’ goods, which created strong incentives for states to wage frequent yet limited wars. The rise of nationalism, in this context, rendered territory controlled by a state more of an ‘inviolable homeland’, which then contributed to the increasing severity and decreasing frequency of interstate wars. The arguments presented in this essay have implications for not only the study of nationalism and war, but also bargaining models of war and the so-called ‘border fixity’ norm.

Contentious borders in the Middle East and North Africa: context and concepts

The recent upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have exerted pressure on the regional state system and its borders. Exploring the altered nature and function of borders in a comprehensive and theory-informed manner, together with their domestic, regional and international implications, is long overdue. As a starting point to this endeavour, this article provides the historical context to the problem of contested borders in the MENA region since the formation of the modern state system in the region until today. While problematizing a number of key concepts, the article proposes to analyse the currently contentious nature of many MENA borders by considering the often deeply conflicting configuration of state authority, legitimacy and territoriality over time; the Arab uprisings mark the most recent of a series of critical junctures. Developments at the international, regional and domestic levels are considered while attention is paid to their intersection. The article concludes by raising the question of whether prevailing conceptualisations of the state and its borders are adequate for a real understanding of past and present developments in the region, suggesting that alternative or additional approaches may be helpful.

Introduction: Non-state Actors in Mediterranean Politics

Introduction: Non-state Actors in Mediterranean Politics

Westphalia Waning? The Uneven Acceptance of International Courts

Is the uneven acceptance of international courts (ICs) an indication of different conceptions of state sovereignty? The conventional idea of the Westphalian model is that it involved the principles of state sovereignty, legal equality of states, and non-intervention in internal affairs. The 1648 Peace of Westphalia often serves as a historical reference, even though the modern conceptions of state sovereignty hardly goes back to the 17th century and the Westphalian treaties of Munster and Osnabruck (Osiander 2001; Beaulac 2004). The idea of sovereignty evolved during the 19th and 20th centuries, yielding several versions. The one relevant here is international legal sovereignty, which implies recognition of polity and territoriality by other states and domestic authority structures that exclude external actors (Krasner 1999). To explore whether different conceptions of sovereignty within the modern states system affect states’ acceptance of ICs, we categorize states according to a set of variables which includes colonial background, geopolitical position, political regime, legal system and resources. We then analyze how these factors correlate with the ratification of different types of ICs – two independent courts and two conflict resolution mechanisms connected to states’ broader acceptance of international organizations. We analyze the acceptance of four ICs with a global reach – the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC), the WTO dispute settlement mechanism (DSM), and the dispute settlement system under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), including the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). These ICs vary in interesting respect. Acceptance of the WTO dispute settlement follows from ratification of the treaty establishing the WTO, and similarly for dispute settlement under UNCLOS and for the criminal jurisdiction of the ICC. However, acceding to UNCLOS implies that states have the opportunity to use ITLOS, the ICJ or ad hoc arbitration for dispute settlement. The ICJ was established in 1945 as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, but the UN member states are only bound by the competence of the ICJ if this is explicitly accepted by the relevant state. This selection allows us to explore the difference between accepting substantive treaty obligations sanctioned by an IC, and only accepting the IC. The motivation of states may be to ensure general acceptance of the substantive obligations, or of the IC – or both. We employ a full dataset for when or if a country accepted each of these four courts. Using logistic regression analysis, we look for the links between a selected number of independent variables and the tendency to join the treaty that established each court. Is there a systematic pattern that indicates how the uneven judicialization of international law works?

Competing Para-Sovereignties in the Borderlands of Europe

ABSTRACTThis article is broadly concerned with how we conceptualise the geography of the tensions between the nominally stable orders of the modern state system against the turbulence of the past few decades in relation to that order, especially in the realm of border controls. Specifically, it considers the rescaling and relocation of border enforcement in the European Union in relation to state sovereignty. The article argues that existing “soft” conceptualisations of the EU’s relationship to sovereignty and bordering—“shared,” “joint,” “multi-level,” “consociational”—are inadequate to understand the transformations of exercises of sovereign power in European borderlands. Instead, we are witnessing the emergence of competing para-sovereignties acting within the same spaces, with both traditional states and the incipient state-like EU fulfilling particular bit roles in realms that were traditionally viewed as the exclusive responsibilities of modern, sovereign, territorial states. This dynamic is made visible in recent years in observing individual humans negotiate and subvert the fluid political geographies of European border space. Examples are taken from the activities of the EU border agency Frontex in southeastern Europe.

Beyond Robert Jackson: post-colonial realities and the patronage state

Why do fundamentally un-statelike units, governed through patronage networks, persist in the modern state system? And why has the myth of the universal territorial state remained so robust despite these alternate political units? I argue, first, that the state system can be divided into bureaucratic and patronage states. While the former derive authority from and exert control over defined territory, the latter use defined populations for the same purposes. Second, I argue that powerful, Weberian states have incentives to bolster patronage states. Rather than allowing alternate modes of rule to threaten the sovereign territorial state’s primacy, they encouraged the pretence of territorial statehood within the post-colonial world. The trappings of sovereignty gave patronage states the rights, resources and incentives to uphold the facade and subdue non-state challengers within their territories. This suggests that the state system rests on a deeper hierarchy that excludes non-sovereign units from the system’s benefits.