scholarly journals Assessing Sus scrofa diversity among continental United States, and Pacific islands populations using molecular markers from a gene banks collection

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
D. A. Faria ◽  
C. Wilson ◽  
Samuel Paiva ◽  
H. D. Blackburn
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Sōsefo Fietangata Havea

<p>On April 2, 1987, the Treaty on Fisheries Between Governments of Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of the United States of America was signed. The signatories to the Fisheries were the 16 members of the South Pacific Forum and the United States of America. After six difficult years of negotiations, the Treaty permitted American fishing vessels to fish in Pacific Islands’ waters in exchange for a substantial access fee. This thesis identifies key aspects of that treaty and examines what it meant from both a theoretical and practical standpoint. How did a collection of small, comparatively weak Pacific states strike a satisfactory deal with the most powerful state on the planet? What did the agreement mean in terms of its political, legal and environmental consequences? As well as looking at the events and negotiations that led to the treaty, this thesis also attempts to discern the key political lessons that flow from this case that might be relevant for the future development of the Pacific island States in the key area of fisheries regulation. The thesis argues that disputes between Pacific nations and the United States over tuna resources and the presence of the Soviet Union in the Pacific region were the two critical factors that led to the adoption of the Treaty. From the United States’ perspective, the Treaty was seen (at the time) as the only viable option if it were to reconsolidate its long and prosperous position in the Pacific region. The US did not want the Soviet Union to capitalize on American fishing disputes with the Pacific islands, and it could not afford for the Soviet Union to establish a strong association with the Pacific islands. The Treaty therefore served three purposes for Washington: (i) it maintained its long friendship with the Pacific islands, (ii) it maintained its fisheries interests in the region, (iii) and it kept the Pacific communist-free. This fusion of US economic and strategic interests gave Pacific Island States a stronger hand in the negotiations than their size and power would have otherwise offered.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Wallis ◽  
Anna Powles

Abstract One of President Joseph Biden's foreign policy priorities is to ‘renew’ and ‘strengthen’ the United States' alliances, as they were perceived to have been ‘undermined’ during the Trump administration, which regularly expressed concern that allies were free-riding on the United States' military capability. Yet the broad range of threats states face in the contemporary context suggests that security assistance from allies no longer only—or even primarily—comes in the form of military capability. We consider whether there is a need to rethink understandings of how alliance relationships are managed, particularly how the goals—or strategic burdens—of alliances are understood, how allies contribute to those burdens, and how influence is exercised within alliances. We do this by analysing how the United States–Australia and Australia–New Zealand alliances operate in the Pacific islands. Our focus on the Pacific islands reflects the United States' perception that the region plays a ‘critical’ role in helping to ‘preserve a free and open Indo-Pacific region’. We conclude that these understandings need to be rethought, particularly in the Pacific islands, where meeting non-traditional security challenges such as economic, social and environmental issues, is important to advancing the United States, Australia and New Zealand's shared strategic goal of remaining the region's primary security partners and ensuring that no power hostile to their interests establishes a strategic foothold.


1973 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
James M. Wilson ◽  
Angel Calderón-Cruz ◽  
John Tarkong

There can be no doubt that the principle of self-determination is applicable to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. The UN Charter applies it. The United States as administering authority under its 1947 trusteeship agreement with the Security Council has explicitly and repeatedly recognized its applicability. The real question is precisely what elements of the principle are applicable, how they are to be applied, and within what framework.


1984 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 484-497
Author(s):  
Arthur John Armstrong ◽  
Howard Loomis Hills

Fourteen years of Micronesian political status negotiations culminated in 1983 with the final signature of the Compact of Free Association between the United States and the Governments of Palau, the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). Upon being approved in accordance with its terms and the constitutional processes of the signatory Governments, the Compact will establish bilateral relationships between the United States and the new states emerging from the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Approval of these future political status arrangements will also provide the basis for termination of the Trusteeship Agreement between the United States and the United Nations Security Council. The Compact defines an international political partnership between the United States and the freely associated states that is without precise precedent in international law or U.S. domestic practice. Under the Compact, each freely associated state will enjoy control over its internal affairs and its foreign relations, including competence to enter into international agreements. Mutual security arrangements, set forth in the Compact and its separate agreements, provide for a U.S. defense umbrella during the life of free association and long-term exclusion of third-country military forces, should any or all of the freely associated states opt for independence at some future date.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e0140338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher L. Burdett ◽  
Brian R. Kraus ◽  
Sarah J. Garza ◽  
Ryan S. Miller ◽  
Kathe E. Bjork

2016 ◽  
Vol 226 ◽  
pp. 35-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila K. Cerqueira-Cézar ◽  
Kerri Pedersen ◽  
Rafael Calero-Bernal ◽  
Oliver C. Kwok ◽  
Isabelle Villena ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathaniel H. Wehr ◽  
Steven C. Hess ◽  
Creighton M. Litton

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document