Non-interference In Internal Affairs Research Articles

Water‐Sharing Saga Between Singapore and Malaysia: A Historical Discord Revisited

Environmental degradation has manifested as the principal source of nontraditional security threat in global politics. In Southeast Asia, the issue of water sharing between Malaysia and Singapore has created severe tensions since their separation in 1965. Over the years, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members, by applying the principle of noninterference in internal affairs, have resolved a number of outstanding issues. However, the water‐sharing dispute between Malaysia and Singapore has been out of the purview of the principle of noninterference, since the majority of ASEAN members perceived it as a bilateral affair that could not be discussed at the ASEAN platform. Against this backdrop, this article analyzes the rationale and implications of the tension over water resource sharing between Malaysia and Singapore. It offers suggestions for reaching a resolution, in order to build a congenial bilateral and regional atmosphere.

CHINA IN THE STRUGGLE FOR RESOURCES IN AFRICA AND ARAB WORLD

The article is dedicated to the struggle for resources in Africa and Arab East, and especially the China’s role in this struggle. Announced by the Beijing in 2002, the course of “going abroad” was marked by the economic expansion of Chinese companies in Africa and Arab countries, largely due to the interest in raw materials, primarily in oil. At the same time, the African and Arab countries are among the foreign policy strategic priorities of the leading Western powers, whose activity in this region has also increased. As shown in the article, the competition for access to natural resources contributed to the emergence of conflicts in the region. The methodological basis of the study is a comparative political approach, methods of analysis and synthesis. The scientific novelty of the paper is that, although the problem of the struggle for resources in Africa and in Arab world is reflected in publications in our country and abroad, the peculiarities of China’s position in this matter have not been yet the object of serious research. The analysis of the topic is relevant in the conditions when Western countries attempt to regulate crises by force, often bypassing the Security Council and the UN Charter. Some analysts view the USA and NATO actions in Libya and the French campaign 2012 in Mali in the light of West desire to displace China from Africa. They also connect crisis in Syria and Iraq with US actions. As the paper shows, Beijing remains committed to the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of other states and stands for political solution of conflicts. But at the same time, it pays an increasing attention to strengthening its military presence in Africa and Arab countries. The author comes to the conclusion that the realization of the initiative “One belt - One road” increases China’s needs in resources for the implementation of ambitious projects in the space of the “belt and road”. The Western countries will resist, so the struggle for resources will not weaken.

(The extent to which interference in internal affairs for humanitarian reasons, affected the principle of sovereignty (A study of jurisprudence in the light of contemporary international law

تناولت الدراسة مدى تأثير التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية لدواعي انسانية على مبدأ السيادة( دراسة فقهية في ضوء مبادئ القانون الدولي المعاصر ) تمثلت مشكلة الدراسة حول مدى وجود حق للدول والمنظمات الدولية في مراقبة وفرض احترام حقوق الإنسان تجاه سيادة الدول لمعرفة ما إذا كان التصرف المتخذ شرعياً أم لا . نبعت أهمية الدراسة في بيان مدى تأثير التدخل الدولي لدواعي إنسانية على مبدأ السيادة لأن التدخل الانساني يتعارض مع بعض الأنظمة القانونية الدولية ولها انعكاسات على مبدأ السيادة وأهمها مبدأ عدم التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية ، ومبدأ المساواة في السيادة ، ومبدأ حظر استخدام القوة أو التهديد بها التي جاءت بهما ميثاق الأمم المتحدة. هدفت الدراسة إلى معرفة الآثار القانونية للتدخل الدولي لدواعي إنسانية على مبدأ السيادة ومبدأ عدم التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية للدول ، و التعرف على التغيرات التي طرأت على مبدأ السيادة في ظل القانون الدولي المعاصر. اتبعت الدراسة المنهج الوصفي التحليلي والمنهج الاستقرائي والمنهج التاريخي. توصلت الدراسة إلى عدد من نتائج أهمها ، حقوق الإنسان ضمن الالتزامات الدولية ، ولا تعتبر من صميم السلطان الداخلي الذي يمنع الدول والمنظمات الدولية من الرقابة الدولية عليها بحجة مبدأ عدم التدخل لأن الرقابة من صميم التزام الدول بتطبيق هذه المعاهدات ، إن حماية حقوق الإنسان بفعل المفاهيم القانونية المعاصرة التي تبنتها الأمم المتحدة ، قد جعلت من هذه الحقوق مسألة دولية لا تقتصر على الاختصاص الداخلي للدول فقط ويعتمد ذلك على مجموعة من الاعتبارات التي تستند إلى فكرة المصلحة الدولية. خرجت الدراسة بعدة توصيات أهمها علي الدول وضع الاتفاقيات الدولية لحقوق الانسان والاعلانات الدولية ذات صلة موضع تنفيذ حتى لا تكون عدم الالتزام بها ذريعة للتدخل في شؤونها الداخلية ، اعتبار أي تدخل دون موافقه الأمم المتحدة أو تحت رقابتها تدخل غير شرعي ويعد من صميم الأعمال العدوانية وفق ميثاق الأمم المتحدة ونظام روما الأساسي المنشئ للمحكمة الجنائية الدولية.

China’s Middle East Policy and the Competition With the United States

This paper focuses on China’s policy in the Middle East and the rivalry with the U.S. The question is that what are the main factors on China’s Middle East policy and its competition with the U.S? The hypothesis regards to three effective factors: “China’s energy dependency” on the Middle East, “economy” and support for “stability” in the Middle East. What is important in China’s competition with the U.S. regarding to its Middle East policy is the substantial difference in ways of treating the countries of the region; China is committed to Westphalia model based on noninterference in internal affairs of the countries and respect the sovereignty of the governments. However, after 9/11, the U.S is seeking a balance between stability and change through intervention in the international affairs and in some cases is looking for a regime change. From the other hand, China, due to its dependency on the region’s energy welcomes America’s military presence in the region for providing stability. The authors by using a descriptive analytical method try to explain the situation of rivalry between China and the United States in Middle East. China is an “emerging power” with high economic growth and in demand of more energy supply. The problem is that a rising power in the region is often a source of concern for hegemony.

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?

Self – Isolation of Albania and the First Steps Toward Opening to the West

The years 80s are important for Albanian diplomacy, because the historical documents of the period observed variation between pre-self-isolation and steps back towards establishing relations with the West. Was the Albanian foreign policy in the '80, a fulfilled diplomacy, after 1985, Enver Hoxha testament whereby it was cornered the general foreign politics? These principles were a mixture of the universal principles of the UN Charter, the principles and the special interests that had Tirana regime in the late twentieth century. The principles established by Enver Hoxha were in the political, economic, cultural and security1. At he political level, the Albanian government will refrain: the principles of respect for independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-interference in internal affairs, cooperation on the basis of mutual interest and weakness.2 In the normal development there was free economic support and international trade while respecting equality, mutual benefits and convenience.3 Albanian state, under the constitution of 1976 on the principles refused aid, loans and credits from abroad. Although in principle the policy of economic cooperation with the outside of Albania was normal, in practice it did not bring any result.4 During this period they tried strongly from the ruling party, cultural exchanges. With most of the countries cultural activities were most frequent. After the death of communist leader E.Hoxha, Alia took his place. Analysis and his vision on international affairs failed in the ninth Congress of the PLA held in November 1986 it did not represent new elements, in order to disclose the place of self-isolation. This platform presented basic principles of the Albanian state positions, for the last period of communism.5 In this Congress, it was stated that: He knew both friends and enemies of his country. He had attacked U.S. policy new global meetings between the two superpowers and making oath that there could be no reconciliation socialist Albania and two superpowers.6 Alia echoed Greek-Serbian thesis, which contained the view that : the Balkan should be for the people of the Balkans. In this context, the policy with neighbors took considerate place during his rule. Communist leader stressed that: the development of good neighborly relations would be a foreign policy priority of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania.7 Albanian government began to take part in round tables, held between representatives of the governments of the Balkan countries. Thus, in February 1988, the Albanian delegation took part for the first time at the meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs in Belgrade Balkan states. Political commentators praised this fact as evidence of substantial changes in the foreign policy of Albania. Reis Malile former minister of foreign affairs, who headed the delegation was defended with the assertion: It is not we who change, it is the others who change.8 Albania was determined as: a place that would cut future meetings of this level in January of 1989. Albanian government it self praised this as a very positive event. Albanian Radio and Television Newspapers and made too echo this issue.9 This was a big step forward for Albania, since it was the first time in the history of the communist regime, which expected a meeting of such a level. With the establishment of these contacts in the diplomatic field, Albania can not be called isolated. However, this association was curtailed and realized within strictly defined limits. Albanian society was still closed. The instinct of self-defense of new phenomena, coming from the Soviet Union and the socialist countries of East Central Europe watched.10

Ukraine: Victim of Geopolitics

Ukraine: Victim of Geopolitics

The China fallacy: How the US can benefit from China's rise and avoid another Cold War by Donald Gross

Donald Gross The fallacy: How the can benefit from China's rise and avoid another Cold War New York: Bloomsbury, 2012. 320pp., $120.00 (cloth) ISBN 978-1441 100832Whether to wield the stick against adversaries or feed them carrots: that is one of the perennial debates in Washington, DC. The debate has at its heart the belief that American actions are one of the primary factors determining the behaviour of other states. When the runs up against a state whose core goals do not appear susceptible to change under the pressure of threats or enticement of rewards, the policy debate is liable to oscillate between extreme conciliation and extreme firmness. Desperately seeking to demonstrate that influence can be decisive, policy proponents are prone to make unlikely promises about the favourable outcomes that will result from their chosen course of action.Such an unlikely promise lies at the heart of Donald Gross's book The Fallacy, which is otherwise an able overview of the state of Sino-American relations and a useful corrective to an American policy debate on that he contends is far narrower than it ought to be (37). Gross contends that the debate is dominated by China hawks who have succeeded in defining as a threat to both the security and economy of the United States, when in reality much of China's military build-up and internal repression can be attributed to its own perception of a US threat. It follows that, by reducing China's perception of this threat, its policy can be altered.Gross argues that by reducing tension with and ultimately arriving at a framework agreement, the groundwork will be laid for the mutual strengthening of the Chinese and American economies, the political liberalization of China, and an enduring Sino-American peace that extinguishes the spectre of nuclear war between the two countries. The central plank of the proposed agreement is for the United States to follow a policy of strategic in the Asia-Pacific and to reduce its military forces and movements in the region in exchange for formally renouncing the use of force against Taiwan and agreeing to submit its maritime disputes to international arbitration (44). would exercise its own restraint by sharply de-escalating tensions in the Taiwan Straits and increasing military transparency, among other more minor measures.Equally wide-ranging initiatives in the economic and political realms would see included in a Trans Pacific Partnership free trade agreement and agreement reached on a basket of political principles modelled on the Helsinki Final Act reached between the and the Soviet Union in 1975. Among the principles to be enshrined would be a commitment by to the unrestricted dissemination of information, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, free exchange of peoples, and open borders, along with mutual commitments to sovereign equality, territorial integrity of states and non-intervention in internal affairs (122-123).A lawyer and diplomat by background, Gross places great faith in the ability of the leaders of the and to negotiate mutually agreeable solutions to issues that arise between them by employing 'win-win' thinking (152). This often gives the book an unfortunate appearance of focusing overly on diplomatic process while not analyzing in sufficient depth either the goals of China's leadership or the country's historical inheritance. …

China en de bescherming van burgers in conflictsituaties

Contemporary violent conflicts are mostly internal in nature. The serious humanitarian consequences that they often cause belong in principle to the internal affairs of the sovereign state in which they occur. Since the 90s, however, the international community is playing an increasingly important role in addressing the humanitarian consequences of internal conflicts. What kind of a partner is the West, meeting in this field with China? From the perspective of identities and role conceptions, this article highlights the Chinese debate on the principle of non-interference in internal affairs. This decades old cornerstone of China’s foreign policy is under discussion as a result of China’s rise, which is raising expectations of a more active role of China, including conflict management. This article examines the changing self-images that lead to the search for a new Chinese role but also points to the enduring influence of older role conceptions. The empirical focus is on Africa, with examples from Chinese policy toward some recent african complex crises.

China’s Energy Diplomacy and Its “Peaceful Rise” Ambition: The Cases of Sudan and Iran

China has underscored its intention for peaceful development with the vision for a “harmonious world.” But at the same time China is keen to play a more proactive role in the international rule-making process, addressing its dissatisfaction with the existing international system. This article examines whether China’s energy diplomacy vis-a-vis Sudan and Iran has helped or hindered its ambition for peaceful development. China’s dealings with Sudan have departed from its long-standing principle of non-interference in internal affairs to one of active intervention, a change intended to help build China’s image as a “responsible power.” China has also demonstrated its ambition and determination to play a more assertive role in dealing with Iran’s nuclear crisis to facilitate safeguarding China’s energy and economic interests. Yet Beijing has been willing to sacrifice its energy interests when necessary in order to be perceived as a responsible stakeholder within the current international establishment. While it might be natural for China to aspire to a more active international role that befits its economic status, China’s objective of building a harmonious world and its peaceful rise ambition will remain unattainable dreams unless Beijing is prepared to accept some universal principles to guide its energy diplomacy.

The implementation of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of Eastern Europe's totalitarian regimes, a consensus seems to have emerged, worldwide, for the introduction of new standards into international standards, commonly called 'democratic clauses'. The aim of these clauses is to promote the emergence of and contribute to the development of states based on respect for certain democratic principles in the world, particularly in Africa. However, the impact of these standards and principles seems to have been relatively limited. As a continent which, in 45 years, has experienced almost 85 coups d'etat, as well as one-party regimes, states hooked into the 'sacrosanct' principle of non-interference in internal affairs, dictatorships known as among the worst in the world, and which was the theatre, between 1963 and 1998, of nearly 26 armed conflicts which affected about 61 per cent of its population, Africa urgently needed to call on these standards and principles in order to promote the return to peace, security and stability in certain of its regions.

The Gordian Knot of Brazilian Foreign Policy: Promoting democracy while respecting sovereignty

President Cardoso has provided decisive impetus for strengthening Brazil's commitment to democracy abroad, both through multilateral diplomacy and foreign policy. However, there exist inherent tensions between the dual principles guiding Brazilian foreign policy, the promotion and protection of democracy abroad and the attachment to national sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs. This study assesses Brazil's response to threats to democracy during the last decade in 10 case studies. It argues that presidential diplomacy has played a key role in furthering the democratic commitment of Brazilian foreign policy. The author thanks Paulo Roberto de Almeida, Juan Fernando London ˜o, Anja Linder, and Riordan Roett and gratefully acknowledges the support of the Democracy Coalition Project (DCP) of the Open Society Institute (OSI) in Washington DC.

Democratic Control of the Armed Forces, the OSCE Code of Conduct, and the Case of Latvia

This article will be devoted to a theme that is becoming increasingly topical in politico-military discussions. Today we are observing the situation that it is no longer sufficient to share the values and principles of contemporary democracies, such as free elections, respect for human rights, self-determination, the rule of law, and so forth as expressed in the Helsinki Final Act and the Paris Charter. Events in the world around us remind us that we must also consider ways to implement these values in everyday life. In order to achieve this, we must admit, at least partly, the necessity of going beyond the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs and must open ourselves up to discussions about domestic jurisdiction relating to matters of security and defense. Some of these principles, such as common markets, open and democratic societies, and human rights, are subjects of discussion in many international forums— the European Council, the OSCE, the UN, the EU, and even NATO—and often shape the headlines in newspapers. However, some issues are covered less frequently although they remain very important even within Europe. One particular subject that emerges as a rich source of enquiry is the role of armed forces and their relationship with civil society, particularly during conflict situations. While this is only one part of the broader concept of building a modern society, it is an essential component. It is commonly accepted that tasks and responsibilities should be strictly divided between civil and military authorities, but where exactly should the line dividing the two domains be drawn? The aim of this article is to outline the basic features of the distribution of power and responsibilities between the civil and military authorities in Latvia. This can provide some insights into how to properly structure the armed forces under democratic control, how to formulate their tasks according to local needs, how to develop a legislative framework, and how to avoid the appearance of “warlords” or uncontrolled armed institutions that threaten the democratic fabric of state and society. These and many other questions spring to mind when one thinks about the subject, but it is not my intention to provide elaborate answers. Rather, I hope to supply some “food for thought” to stimulate further discussion on the adequacy of democratic control of the armed forces in Latvia. The OSCE Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security will serve as an organizing

Insights from ASEAN´s Foreign Policy Co operation: The “ASEAN Way”, a Real Spirit or a Phantom?

Notwithstanding substantial criticism over the past two years, is regarded as a paragon case of successful regional co-operation. This article seeks to contribute to the debate about the nature of ASEAN's co-operation. Have members been guided by a sense of community in their foreign policy co-operation? The article examines the nexus between regional identity and foreign policy by gauging the regional states' norm compliance with regard to the ASEAN way. It focuses on decision-making in relation to diplomatic initiatives relevant to the grouping's security. The main emphasis is on the post-Cold War era, with a backdrop provided by specific events in the 1970s and 1980s. Introduction The achievements of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) since its establishment in 1967 are certainly impressive. In a region previously beset by confrontation, no armed conflict has erupted between the members, although bilateral tensions have surfaced on several occasions. In the international arena, has managed to attain a high profile and the regional grouping has acted in concert in the economic as well as in the diplomatic spheres. This record renders he principal success of indisputable. However, the question that arises is what has been the underlying basis of co-operation? Have he countries co-operated because they conceived of the region as a community where states share one common or has co-operation been motivated by functional considerations derived from the realization that one's bargaining power increases if the region speaks with one voice? This article sets out to answer that question, and by doing so, intends to contribute to the debate about the essential nature of state interaction in Southeast Asia. Recent critical assessments of and its approach to cooperation within the Regional Forum (ARF) have rekindled the debate between rationalist, particularly realist, and constructivist scholars about which factors determine state interactions in Southeast Asia and, by extension, in the wider Asia-Pacific region. [1] Constructivist scholars have posited the existence, or at least emergence, of a regional community among the states. [2] This perspective is underpinned by the premise that possesses a shared identity which exerts crucial influence on states' behaviour. These identity-based accounts of co-operation have emphasized the importance of norms. According to that view, shared norms represent collective expectations about proper behaviour for a given identity, and hence define how an actor should behave. [3] Norm compliance then becomes an important indicator of the existence of a regional community with a distinct identity. To date, most discus sions of the notion of a Southeast Asian community have examined the dimension of intra-ASEAN relations. The question of what role norms have played for decision-making and implementation with regard to ASEAN's external relations has largely been neglected. [4] This article seeks to fill that gap by probing whether the norms of the ASEAN way have had a significant impact on co-operation in foreign policy. leaders, as well as some scholars, have emphasized the importance of the so-called ASEAN way for the success of regional co-operation. [5] The ASEAN way entails behavioural norms encapsulated in a code-of-conduct and a set of procedural norms. [10] The former contains standard norms of international law: respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and non-use of force. More unique to ASEAN, and hence more relevant for an assessment of the identity--foreign policy nexus are procedural norms which prescribe decision-making procedures that leaders are expected to follow. According to those prescriptions, ASEAN's decision-making process should observe the principles of musyawarah (consultation) and mufakat (consensus). …

The Romanian Communist Party and the World Socialist System: A Redefinition of Unity

Undoubtedly David Floyd is correct in his statement that “by far the most important and original of the sections [within the Romanian Workers' Party April, 1964, Statement] for the communist world as a whole was the one dealing with political relations between the communist countries, though it was the statement on Comecon which attracted most attention at the time.” Among the major points the Romanians made in this Statement was that the formal basis of relations enunciated by Khrushchev in 1955 was to become the real basis of relations among socialist nations. Relations were to be based on “the principles of national independence and sovereignty, equal rights, mutual advantage, comradely assistance, noninterference in internal affairs, observance of territorial integrity, [and] the principles of socialist internationalism.” The Romanians spelled this out in underscored print and followed it with the statement that “the strict observance of the basic principles of the new type relations among the socialist countries is the primary prerequisite of the unity and cohesion of these countries and of the world socialist system performing its decisive role in the development of mankind.”

The Limits of Detente

1IKE many other observers, Karl Marx noted that from time of Peter Great Russian foreign policy showed a ^general tendency merely to expansionism, but to un power. He put this even more strongly in a speech of January 1876, when spoke of Russia's lodestar being the empire of world. Engels, too, wrote of her dreaming about universal supremacy. They were referring to any fixed plan, or wholly explicit intention, but rather to spirit and character of Russian State. The extent to which this general tendency (though, of course, with different content) still subsists, and degree to which it is expressed in actual practice, are clearly cen tral to any but a superficial estimate of Soviet foreign policy. Even under Tsars expansion was constant. There were periods of stasis, even of withdrawal. The provisions of Treaty of Paris, which limited Russian naval power in Black Sea, were repudiated until opportunity at last arose in 1871. And comparably, Soviet Union abandoned expansion for more than a decade before 1939. The assurances given that this would be permanent were various and formal. In sensitive matter of Baltic re publics, for example, a series of treaties provided against any conceivable Russian pressure. The renunciation of rights of sovereignty forever in a treaty signed (to take Lithuanian case) on July 12, 1920, was followed on September 22, 1926, by a nonaggression pact, twice renewed in thirties, guaranteeing Lithuanian sovereignty in all circumstances. This was strength ened in 1933 by a convention defining aggression, which said that no considerations of a political, military, economic or any other nature would justify it. Even when, on October 10, 1939, Lithuania signed under pressure a Mutual Assistance Pact, under which Soviet troops set up bases in country, its Article 7 guaranteed that this would not in any way affect sovereign rights of contracting parties, in particular their state organi zations, economic and social systems, military measures and, in general, principle of nonintervention in internal affairs. An nexation came following summer (and is one of Stalin ist measures repudiated by Khrushchev: he wept but

Agrarian Problems and the Moscow-Peking Axis

Officially the one-centeredness of the Communist world ended in 1943. In that year the Communist International, which had recognized the Communist Party of the Soviet Union as the hegemon, was dissolved, because the new political situation demanded the “great flexibility and independence” of the various “sections.“ The people's democracies that a few years later came into being in Eastern Europe emphasized, as Brzezinski has noted, that they “were to be sovereign—not Soviet. Their relations with the USSR were to be, naturally, ‘friendly’ but founded on mutual recognition of the principles of independence and noninterference in internal affairs.“ Thus ideologically the transformation of international communism into a complex with many allegedly independent power-holding and power-seeking Communist parties was proclaimed long before Togliatti in 1956 asserted that the Communist world was becoming “polycentric.”

Scientific and Technical Cooperation Between the USSR and Other Socialist Countries

In his report at the 21st Congress of the CPSU N. S. Khrushchev pointed out that the Soviet Union regarded it as its primary task to work for the greater unity of the socialist countries, and for the further development of economic cooperation and cultural ties among them on the basis of proletarian internationalism and the fraternal friendship of free peoples. The economic, scientific and technical cooperation of the USSR and the People's Democracies is based on their sincere desire to help one another to achieve general economic expansion. Their joint efforts are based on the principles of full equality, mutual benelit, mutual respect for their national interests, and non-interference in internal affairs.

Organization of American States

It was reported that during a meeting of the Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) on February 8, 1960, a debate took place on the alleged violations of human rights perpetuated by the government of General Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina of the Dominican Republic. Dr. Falcon-Briceno, Venezuelan ambassador to the United States, who had brought the charge on instructions of his government, contended that a concern for human rights was a basic function of the inter-American system and called upon the Council to investigate the situation. He was challenged by the Dominican ambassador, Mr. Diaz Ordoñez, who insisted that the prevailing situation was a matter of exclusively domestic concern to his government and stressed the fact that non-intervention in internal affairs was a basic principle of the inter-American system. The delegates were urged to action by the delegate of Honduras, who expressed the view that the principle of non-intervention should not close the door to action deemed to be necessary for the preservation of human rights and liberties. After a threehour debate, the Council reportedly decided, by a vote of 20 to none, with 1 abstention (the Dominican Republic), to initiate an inquiry into the matter. To this end, five nations—Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador, Peru, and the United States—were appointed as a working group to consider whether and how the organization could conduct an investigation in the case.