Fighting for Independence in East Timor

2019 ◽  
pp. 114-133
Author(s):  
Marina E. Henke
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
East Timor ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Un General Assembly

This chapter describes how Australia decided to launch a multilateral military intervention to stop the bloodshed in East Timor. The force Australia assembled was called the International Force East Timor (INTERFET). Despite the humanitarian character of the intervention, few of the participants joined INTERFET on their own initiative. Rather, Australia had to conduct an explicit recruitment process that involved cajoling countries to join the operation. Australia's diplomatic networks played an indispensable role in this process: Australian officials exploited these networks to retrieve information on deployment preferences of potential coalition participants. Australia also used the APEC summit in Auckland and the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York as opportunities to make bilateral appeals for troop contributions. Nevertheless, Australia's diplomatic cloud had its limitations. Especially when it came to recruiting countries from outside of the Asia-Pacific region, Australian networks were insufficient. Australia thus turned to the United States and the United Kingdom for assistance in drawing multilateral support for its coalition, thereby leaving these states to function as cooperation brokers. The chapter then considers the deployment decisions of the three largest troop-contributing countries: Thailand, Jordan, and the Philippines; Canada, a deeply embedded state with Australia; and Brazil, a weakly embedded state with Australia.

A1. UN SEC.-GEN. KOFI ANNAN, REPORT TO THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONCERNING ISRAEL'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE SEPARATION WALL IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, NEW YORK, 24 NOVEMBER 2003 (EXCERPTS).

2004 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-157
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
The United States ◽  
Marshall Islands ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
Un General Assembly

The secretary-general's report was prepared in keeping with UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/13 of 21 October 2003, which ““demand[ed] that Israel stop and reverse the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, which is in departure of the Armistice Line of 1949 and is in contradiction to relevant provisions of international law.”” The resolution had also called upon the secretary-general to report periodically on Israel's compliance with the demand of the resolution, which was approved by 144 member states (including all members of the European Union), with four votes against (Israel, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the United States) and twelve abstentions. The secretary-general's report covers the background, description, construction progress, and impact of the wall. Reproduced below are the secretary-general's concluding ““observations”” and the summary of Israel's legal position. The document is available on the International Court of Justice Web site at www.icj-cij.org.

Diplomacy in the ASEAN

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Core Element ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Security

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is the focal point for regional diplomacy and interstate governance in Southeast Asia. Since its foundation in 1967, the organization’s membership, institutional footprint, and mandate have expanded markedly. The now ten member states—Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam—and its professed ASEAN Community are engaged in an ever-expanding array of regional initiatives across political-security, economic, and sociocultural concerns. The organization is of growing importance for states beyond the region as well, given the region’s place within the wider “Indo-Pacific” region and ongoing tensions between the United States and China. The literature on diplomacy in ASEAN is vast and varied. Much material centers on the origins, evolution, and efficacy of ASEAN as a regional organization and its diplomatic principles and norms, the so-called ASEAN way. The literature surveyed here examines the institutional and normative context within which ASEAN diplomacy operates and highlights major contemporary issues in the study of ASEAN diplomacy. This article is structured in eleven sections. It begins with a series of general, canonical accounts of ASEAN diplomacy and governance. The second section highlights literature engaged in a debate over the efficacy and consequence of ASEAN and its diplomatic norms. The third section surveys literature that centers attention on a core element of the study of ASEAN diplomacy: the prospects of a security community in Southeast Asia. The fourth section surveys a growing and related literature that examines the practice and discourse in ASEAN diplomacy. The fifth section highlights literature that situates ASEAN diplomacy within the context of the institutions of the wider Asia-Pacific region, including the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), East Asian Summit (EAS), and ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM+). Section six focuses on regional peace and conflict management between ASEAN member states. The seventh section explores two additional intraregional issues: leadership in ASEAN and relations with the so-called CLMV states of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam, with a focus on Myanmar. Section eight centers on track two diplomacy and the role of civil society organizations in regional diplomacy and governance. Section nine examines institutional evolution with a focus on the changing organizational and normative context of ASEAN diplomacy. Section ten highlights ASEAN-China relations with a focus on the diplomatic management of the South China Sea disputes. The final section surveys a growing literature that places ASEAN diplomacy and governance in a comparative context.

Security Council

1947 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-98
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Alphabetical Order ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
One Year ◽  
United Nations Charter

Under Article 23 of the United Nations Charter, the Security Council was to be composed of representatives of five permanent Members — China, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union — plus six non-permanent Members elected by the General Assembly. The election at the First Part of the First Session of the General Assembly of Egypt, Mexico, and the Netherlands for one year terms, and Australia, Brazil, and Poland for two year terms, enabled the Security Council to convene for its first meeting on January 18, 1946, at Church House, Dean's Yard, Westminster, in London. The first 23 meetings were held in London, and the balance of 87 for the period under review either at Hunter College in New York or at Lake Success on Long Island. The first President of the Council was Mr. N. J. 0. Makin (Australia) who held office for one month, and was followed for similar periods by the representatives of the other states members in alphabetical order of the names of their countries in English.

scholarly journals The Sudanese Women’s Advocacy Mission to New York and Washington DC

1970 ◽  
pp. 72-75
Author(s):  
Marie-Christine Aquarone
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Active Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
Peace Movement ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
Peace Negotiations ◽  
The World ◽  
Un General Assembly

In June 2000, eight women from the war-torn country of Sudan traveled to the United States to present their message to the world. They wished to say that they were tired of the 45-year-old Sudanese civil war and they wanted to announce that they had formed a peace movement and were calling for an active role in the peace negotiations, to help end the war. Their discussions with United Nationsofficials and high-ranking officers of agencies and nongovernmental organizations coincided with the Beijing +5 conference, a conference on women’s rights convened by the UN General Assembly that was attended by more than 10,000 female delegates from 180 countries.

Selective Membership

2019 ◽  
pp. 87-109
Author(s):  
Thomas K. Robb ◽  
David James Gill
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Existing Form

This chapter assesses in detail the exclusion of Britain from the ANZUS Treaty, which embarrassed British policymakers and undermined many of the United Kingdom's interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Prime Minister Clement Attlee had initially accepted exclusion, but Winston Churchill's election to office in October of 1951 resulted in a concerted effort to gain membership. Although Australia and New Zealand remained sympathetic to an expanded treaty, both feared that pushing British membership too forcefully risked the United States dissolving the ANZUS Treaty. Despite enjoying a degree of recovery, economic limitations and ongoing commitments to Europe and the Middle East meant that the United Kingdom was unable to offer the antipodean states a credible alternative to existing arrangements. Australia and New Zealand consequently attempted to secure membership for Britain but prioritized ongoing cooperation with the United States. The major obstacle to British membership in ANZUS remained the United States. As far as U.S. policymakers interpreted matters, British inclusion provided few benefits and considerable economic and strategic drawbacks. Yet, U.S. officials preferred to use arguments about race and imperialism to justify British omission from the treaty. Ultimately, the United States remained committed to maintaining ANZUS in its existing form and rebuffed efforts by the antipodean powers to secure British inclusion.

scholarly journals ТЕРРИТОРИАЛЬНЫЕ СПОРЫ КИТАЯ В ЮЖНО-КИТАЙСКОМ МОРЕ

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A.T. Ibragimova ◽  
◽  
Chuke Wu ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Reef Islands ◽  
Free Shipping ◽  
Hydrocarbon Reserves

For decades, Beijing has been arguing with several countries of the Asia-Pacific region over the territorial ownership of a number of islands in the South China Sea, on the shelf of which significant hydrocarbon reserves were discovered. We are talking primarily about the Sisha archipelago (Paraselsky Islands), the Nansha (Spratly) and Huangyan (Scarborough Reef) islands. Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia and the Philippines are involved in this debate to one degree or another. The United States is not a party to the dispute, but it does not recognize the claims of China and insists on its right to “free shipping” in the region.

The United States and the Asia-Pacific Region: Security Strategy for the Obama Administration

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph A. Cossa ◽  
Brad Glosserman ◽  
Michael A. McDevitt ◽  
Nirav Patel ◽  
James Przystup ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
Obama Administration

scholarly journals Social Sensing of Heatwaves

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 3717
Author(s):  
James C. Young ◽  
Rudy Arthur ◽  
Michelle Spruce ◽  
Hywel T. P. Williams
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
The United States ◽  
Measured Temperature ◽  
Social Sensing ◽  
Public Response ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Social Reaction ◽  
Twitter Activity ◽  
The Uk

Heatwaves cause thousands of deaths every year, yet the social impacts of heat are poorly measured. Temperature alone is not sufficient to measure impacts and “heatwaves” are defined differently in different cities/countries. This study used data from the microblogging platform Twitter to detect different scales of response and varying attitudes to heatwaves within the United Kingdom (UK), the United States of America (US) and Australia. At the country scale, the volume of heat-related Twitter activity increased exponentially as temperature increased. The initial social reaction differed between countries, with a larger response to heatwaves elicited from the UK than from Australia, despite the comparatively milder conditions in the UK. Language analysis reveals that the UK user population typically responds with concern for individual wellbeing and discomfort, whereas Australian and US users typically focus on the environmental consequences. At the city scale, differing responses are seen in London, Sydney and New York on governmentally defined heatwave days; sentiment changes predictably in London and New York over a 24-h period, while sentiment is more constant in Sydney. This study shows that social media data can provide robust observations of public response to heat, suggesting that social sensing of heatwaves might be useful for preparedness and mitigation.

France Accused: French North Africa before the United Nations, 1952–1962

2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Thomas
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
North Africa ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Algerian War ◽  
North African ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Nationalist Parties ◽  
Major General

In the decade after 1952 France faced sustained United Nations criticism of its colonial policies in north Africa. As membership of the UN General Assembly expanded, support for the non-aligned states of the Afro-Asian bloc increased. North African nationalist parties established their permanent offices in New York to press their case for independence. Tracing UN consideration of French North Africa from the first major General Assembly discussion of Tunisia in 1952 to the end of the Algerian war in 1962, this article considers the tactics employed on both sides of the colonial/anti-colonial divide to manipulate the UN Charter's ambiguities over the rights of colonial powers and the jurisdiction of the General Assembly in colonial disputes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document