scholarly journals Shrinking Civic Space for Human Rights Defenders in Afghanistan Following the U.S. Military Drawdown in 2014

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Abdul Rahman Yasa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Peace Negotiations ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many ◽  
Speak Up ◽  
Civic Space ◽  
The U.S

Civic space, an imperative to a democratic society where citizens can exercise their basic rights, is now under attack in Afghanistan. The fall of the Islamic Emirate in 2001 by a coalition of the U.S.-led military intervention grounded the rise of a vibrant environment for civil society and human rights defenders (HRDs). Promoting and safeguarding democratic values, mainly freedom of speech, assembly, and association, enshrined within a progressive constitutional framework, had turned to the topic of the day. The heavy presence of foreign troops with the money influx put strong support behind the nascent Afghan CSOs, HRDs, and democracy advocates to speak up for the many repressed Afghans. However, the drawdown of foreign troops proceeded by protracted political infighting between Afghan leaders over power-sharing, shaped a grim milestone for civic space and human rights in 2014. The Afghan security forces had learned but not enough to take full security responsibility. Meanwhile, the Afghan leaders were wrestling over power in Kabul while an emboldened Taliban was threatening civic space by making more territorial gains in provinces. Consequently, the security situation deteriorated dramatically, triggering widespread public protests. To respond, the government resorted to the use of force against protesters, and democratic advocates and introduced legal restrictions to prevent any prospective unrest. Finally, the U.S. military withdrawal has doubled concerns over the loss of the rights under civic space. Therefore, the United States should stay, not forever, but until the Afghan peace negotiations succeed.

American and Canadian Civil Actions Alleging Human Rights Violations Abroad by Oil and Gas Companies

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Horlick ◽  
Joe Cyr ◽  
Scott Reynolds ◽  
Andrew Behrman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens ◽  
The Government ◽  
Oil And Gas Companies ◽  
Political Question ◽  
The U.S

Under the United States Alien Tort Statute, which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for human rights violations that are violations of the law of nations, plaintiffs have filed claims against multinational oil and gas corporations for the direct or complicit commission of such violations carried out by the government of the country in which the corporation operated. In addition to exercising jurisdiction over U.S. corporations, U.S. courts have exercised jurisdiction in cases involving non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside the U.S.The exercise of jurisdiction by U.S. courts over non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside of the U.S. raises serious questions as to the jurisdictional foundation on which the power of U.S. courts to adjudicate them rests. Defences that foreign defendants can raise against the exercise of jurisdiction by the U.S. courts are an objection to the extraterritorial assertion of jurisdiction, the act of state doctrine, the political question doctrine, forum non conveniens, and the principle of comity. These defences are bolstered by the support of the defendant’s home government and other governments.

Basic U. S. Sources For Current Research In International Law: An Elementary Vade-Mecum

1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adolf Sprudzs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many ◽  
The U.S

Among the many old and new actors on the international stage of nations the United States is one of the most active and most important. The U.S. is a member of most existing intergovernmental organizations, participates in hundreds upon hundreds of international conferences and meetings every year and, in conducting her bilateral and multilateral relations with the other members of the community of nations, contributes very substantially to the development of contemporary international law. The Government of the United States has a policy of promptly informing the public about developments in its relations with other countries through a number of documentary publication, issued by the Department of State

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and Other European Fora on Migration

1994 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 580-590
Author(s):  
Jan Niessen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Scientific Cooperation ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Prevention Center ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
General Secretary

In the 1970s, during the Cold War era, European and North American states began a dialogue in Helsinki which became known as the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), or the Helsinki process. For Western states the CSCE served as a platform to raise questions related to security in Europe and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Eastern European states considered the CSCE as a means to secure the postwar borders and an opportunity to discuss economic and scientific cooperation. Today, 51 European States, plus the United States of America and Canada, participate in this process. Notwithstanding the many and often intense political tensions between the West and the East during those twenty years, quite a number of conferences, seminars and other meetings were held and a great many agreements were adopted and documents issued, dealing with matters related to CSCE's three main areas of concern: security in Europe; cooperation in the fields of economics, science, technology and environment; the promotion of human rights. In response to the fundamental changes in Europe in the late 1980s, the CSCE was given a new impetus and its operational framework was broadened. CSCE offices were established in Prague (CSCE Secretariat), Vienna (Conflict Prevention Center) and Warsaw (Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) with the aim to strengthen and monitor compliance with CSCE commitments, especially in the area of human rights. A Parliamentary Assembly was established and met twice, first in Budapest and then in Helsinki. A General Secretary and a High Commissioner on Minorities were appointed, with offices in Vienna and The Hague, respectively.

scholarly journals The Rule of Law in the Middle East and the Islamic World

2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 167-171
Author(s):  
Mohammad Fadel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Average Length ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Critical Perspective ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Varying Length ◽  
The Government

This work grew out of a series of lectures that were delivered over atwo-year period between 1996 and 1998 at the Centre of Islamic andMiddle Eastern Law (CIMEL) at the School of Oriental and AfricanStudies (SOAS), University of London, on the genera] subject of the rule oflaw in the Middle East and Islamic countries. Subsequently, materials wereadded dealing particularly with issues relating to human rights law. Thecontributors to this work are a combination of legal academics, human rights activists, lawyers and judges, who hale from various countries in theArab world, Iran, the United States, Great Britain and Germany.There are a total of fourteen separate chapters, of varying length andquality. The book is not lengthy - including notes and authors’ biographies,it is 180 pages long. The average length of each chapter is between ten andfifteen pages. Despite the diversity of countries surveyed, all the essays areconcerned with generic questions regarding the rule of law, whether in atheoretical sense, viz., whether the notion that legitimate governmentalaction is limited to those acts that are deemed lawful by a pre-existing setor rules, or in a practical sense, viz., assuming that the formal legal regimeof a given state recognizes the rule of law in a theoretical sense, whetherthe coercive apparatus of the state in fact recognizes legal limitations onits conduct.Perhaps the most interesting (it is certainly the most lengthy, at 35 pages),and most important, essay in this work is the very fiit one, authored byAdel Omar Sherif, an Egyptian judge, wherein the author provides a digestof the landmark decisions of the Egyptian Supreme Constitutional Court.While the work can be criticized for taking on the appearance of a meresurvey of decisions, without taking a critical perspective to the Court’sprecedents, it is nonetheless a very valuable contribution for those lawyersand scholars who cannot read Arabic but nonetheless wish to gain insightinto Egypt’s legal culture. The modest task of relating the decisions ofEgypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court is especially important given thecliches regarding the absence of effective judicial institutions in the Arabworld. Sherifs contribution effectively dispels that myth. His article revealsthe Egyptian Supreme Constitutional Court to be a vibrant institution thattakes its constitutional duties seriously, and discharges those duties withintegrity, and when it finds that the government has acted unlawfully, it willstrike down the offensive legislation, or rule against the government ...

A Review of DOE ECUT Tribology Surveys

1986 ◽  
Vol 108 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. S. Dake ◽  
J. A. Russell ◽  
D. C. Debrodt
Keyword(s):  
Friction And Wear ◽  
Surface Modifications ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Energy Losses ◽  
Research Needs ◽  
Technology Program ◽  
Heat Engines ◽  
The Government ◽  
The U.S

Experts estimate that in 1978 over four quadrillion Btu of energy were lost in the United States because of simple friction and wear. The Energy Conversion and Utilization Technology Program (ECUT) in the U.S. Department of Energy commissioned six surveys from various experts in the field of tribology to learn about the causes of these energy losses and how to reduce them. The surveys included: 1) identification of typical tribology energy sinks in industry, 2) reduction of tribological losses in utilities and transportation, 3) tribological research needed for advanced heat engines, 4) energy conservation potential of new surface modifications, 5) identification of current tribology work sponsored by the government, and 6) an assessment of industrial research needs. A summary of the major findings of each survey is included in this paper.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THINK TANKS IN THE U.S. IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY: THE POLITICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT

2020 ◽  
pp. 99-109
Author(s):  
Iana V. Shchetinskaia ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Rand Corporation ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Crises ◽  
Political Factors ◽  
The Government ◽  
The U.S

Research institutions and specifically think tanks have existed and developed in the United States for more than 100 years. Since their inception, they have changed and evolved in many ways, while expanding their research foci and political impact. Since the 2010s, a few experts in the field have observed that the U.S. policy expertise is now in crisis. To understand current challenges of policy analysis institutions it is important to study them in a historical retrospective. This article explores the political and socioeconomic contexts in which think tanks emerged and developed from 1910 to the 1950-s. It particularly examines the role of international crises, as well as domestic political factors, such as the role of philanthropy organizations, institutional changes in the government, and others. It discusses how these domestic and foreign policy aspects affected the early development of the Carnegie Endowment for the International Peace (1910), the Council on Foreign Relations (1921) and the RAND Corporation (1948).

Global Application of Intersectionality Theory

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-53
Author(s):  
Johanna Bond
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Black Girls ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Gender Based Violence ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
The Many ◽  
Inadequate Prenatal Care ◽  
The Right

This chapter delves into examples of global intersectionality to illustrate the need for a thorough and consistent intersectional approach to human rights violations around the world. Although it is impossible to provide an exhaustive analysis of the many and varied types of intersectional human rights violations, this chapter offers multiple examples of intersectional human rights violations, including (1) gender-based violence, including both non-state actors who commit intimate partner violence and sexual violence in armed conflict; (2) maternal mortality and inadequate prenatal care in Brazil; (3) coerced sterilization among the Roma in Europe; (4) disproportionate discipline and punishment of Black girls in the United States; and (5) inconsistent LGBTQI rights. These case studies implicate different human rights, including the right to be free from violence, the right to education, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Each example demonstrates how a more nuanced, intersectional lens is necessary to capture the rights at stake and to contemplate appropriate remedies for victims of human rights violations in full.

Japan and World Order

Worldview ◽  
1972 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Robert W. Baraett
Keyword(s):  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
Doing Business ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Real Responsibility ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Pluralistic World ◽  
Do So

The anomaly in present U.S.-Japanese relations is that, while both countries warmly approve each other's professed foreign policies, neither country has mastered the new styles of doing business with each other necessitated by domestic trends, imperfectly perceived, which affect how each country looks upon itself and expects the other to understand it.The United States recognizes, at last, limits on its resources, power and capabilities. At home, the U.S. Government must devote a larger part of its budget to urgent social and economic needs of its own people. Looking outward, the Government rations sparingly the wealth it shares with others and insists that others, able to do so, take a larger part of real responsibility for preservation of world order. The American people are weary of ideological overtones in power confrontations abroad and are beginning to accept, with all of the risks and confusion of new perspectives, the reality of a pluralistic world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document