Notebook LM notes

The following are the full contents of every case study identified in the provided text, grouped by their respective units.#

Unit 1: Understanding Power and Global Politics#

Haiti: The Republic of NGOs In 2010, Haiti suffered a devastating earthquake. Before 2010, a lot of NGOs were already active there, but after the earthquake the number of NGOs increased to the point that Haiti is now often called “The Republic of NGOs”. These NGOs provide anything from food to education to foster homes. In 2018, The Times reported that employees from Oxfam, an NGO focused on poverty alleviation, had hired sex workers in Haiti and the organization had tried to cover this up. The UK's Charity Commission concluded there was a “culture of poor behaviour”. Other concerns in Haiti revolve around the growth of orphanages and how this is creating “poverty orphans”, rather than true orphans who do not have any parents. US anthropologist Timothy Schwartz explains in Travesty in Haiti: A true account of Christian missions, orphanages, fraud, food aid and drug trafficking how Haitian parents sometimes decide to give their child up for adoption in the hope of them achieving a better future, but that this leaves the child disconnected from society. NGOs have over time also become the main source of education in Haiti, further disconnecting Haitians from their government. Most, if not all NGOs are founded with good intentions aiming to offer some form of relief, but over time Haiti has become a country arguably run by NGOs, rather than by its own government.

Food and beverage MNCs Food provision is an area in which multinational corporations have become an important actor. In 2017, Oxfam launched a campaign focusing on 10 of the world's most powerful food and beverage companies: Associated British Foods (ABF), Coca-Cola, Danone, General Mills, Kellogg's, Mars, Mondelez International, Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever. The brands they own and the products they make for supermarkets under another label represent a large portion of the shopping basket of many households. With the campaign, Oxfam tried to increase transparency and accountability as the sourcing of food is not always clear, nor are the production circumstances. Palm oil can be found in pretty much any processed food, and is derived from oil palm trees. Rainforests in Indonesia and Malaysia have been cut down to make way for oil palms, resulting in deforestation and biodiversity loss. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil tries to make this palm oil production more sustainable, with members including some of the big 10.

Actual and perceived views on immigration in the United States Polarization can often be overstated and oversimplified. The perception can also be that people hold a greater number of polarizing views than in reality. There are two main political parties in the US: the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The Beyond Conflict research group researched the positions that various Democratic and Republican voters take on the issue of immigration, and then asked citizens what they thought the positions of the voters for the other party were. We can see that both the Democrats’ and Republicans’ positions range from completely open to completely closed borders, with a clear majority of each party on either side, but a large overlap of positions between the two groups as well. The perceptions of each other, however, are much more polarized. The Republican voters expect the Democrats to be only strongly or moderately pro-open borders, and the Democrat voters expect the Republicans to be only strongly or moderately pro-closed borders, with virtually no overlap.

Maritime law Perhaps the most well-developed area of international law is maritime law. It was in the interest of colonial powers, first the Netherlands and then Great Britain, to clearly define international waters and what is legally allowed to take place in the ocean. Their main interest was to avoid piracy or warring states when they were shipping goods and people. Hundreds of years of development in this area have led to laws about which areas of the sea a state has sovereignty over. States are entitled to an exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which equates to 200 nautical miles from the coast of the state. States have the right to exploit the area within their EEZ. This is codified in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Seas and enforced by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg. In 2013, Greenpeace organized protests against Russian oil drilling in the Arctic and one of its ships was seized by Russian authorities. In a case put forward by the Netherlands, under whose flag the Greenpeace ship was sailing, ITLOS decided that Russian actions were illegal, considering they undertook action outside their EEZ.

---

Unit 2: Peace and Conflict#

IGOs claiming to aim for peace: United Nations In 1957, the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) deployed so-called peacekeepers to the border between Egypt and Israel. This was the first armed peacekeeping mission by the UN. The efforts established peace in the sense that they separated the two warring parties and prevented war between them for ten years. The withdrawal of UNEF in 1967 paved the way for the outbreak of the Six Day War between the two countries.

NGOs claiming to aim for peace: Greenpeace Greenpeace is one of the most well-known NGOs, aiming “to expose global environmental problems, and to force solutions which are essential to a green and peaceful future”. Founded in 1971 by activists who opposed US nuclear testing in Alaska, the organization remains committed to non-violence as one of its primary values. Greenpeace’s current priorities are to: protect biodiversity in all its forms; prevent pollution and abuse of the Earth’s ocean, land, air and fresh water; end all nuclear threats; promote peace, global disarmament and non-violence.

US involvement in Israel The United States has a long history of involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was the first country to recognize Israel when it was founded on 14 May 1948. In 1978, US President Jimmy Carter offered the presidential retreat, Camp David, as a neutral place for peace talks between Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. This resulted in the 1978 Camp David Accords. In the 1990s, US President Bill Clinton was involved in the negotiation of the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. However, not all US intervention was seen as impartial. In 2020, President Donald Trump launched a plan for peace between Israel and Palestine, called Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People. He also decided to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. Trump’s presentation of himself as a suitable mediator was met with a lot of scepticism by the Palestinians and the plan did not come to fruition. This makes it clear that third parties cannot always be trusted to intervene selflessly and constructively in a conflict.

2019 El Angel graffiti protest In 2019, Mexican protesters spraypainted graffiti on a national monument called the Angel of Independence, referred to by locals as El Angel. They were protesting against police violence and gender-based violence (specifically against women and girls). The protest caused a lot of controversy, but many of the reports were more about the damage to the monument than about the women and girls suffering from violence. Publications spoke about the “defacing of our Angel” and zoomed in on protesters spray painting men, and the mayor of Mexico City stated that “violence is not fought with violence”. The local government quickly erected wooden barriers to prevent any more damage and restore the monument. In response, protesters and activists pointed out that there was many times more attention given to the spray painting of the monument than to the acts of sexual violence that were being protested.

Conflict map of Myanmar A conflict map detailing the primary actors involved in the conflict in Myanmar is shown in figure 12. Since Myanmar's independence in 1948, its military (the Tatmadaw) has had a very influential role in politics and has controlled the government since its coup d'état in 2021. In figure 12, the Tatmadaw is indicated as the main conflict party. The Tatmadaw have largely separated themselves from the wider society with separate schools for their children, separate compounds to live in and they even built a new capital city, fully planned to their wishes. The Tatmadaw controls a large portion of the country’s economy, indicated in the arrow that states “exports; natural resources”. International actors, who meet the Tatmadaw with aid, investment or condemnation are identified in the left-hand green box. The Tatmadaw is largely made up of the Buddhist Bamar people, but there are over 130 other ethnic groups in Myanmar. The other green circles indicate actors the Tatmadaw is in conflict with, such as the Muslim Rohingya minority and the Kachins. The Rohingya are victims of “persecution” and killings by the Myanmar military, labelled a genocide by various governments and NGOs. Some of the main issues pertaining to the Rohingya are their lack of “citizenship” (the government does not recognize them as citizens of Myanmar) and, as a consequence, “land rights”. Many have fled to Bangladesh (identified in the arrow as “migration of refugees”), with up to a million living in the largest refugee camp in the world.

The Milgram experiment It may seem like a big leap from a joke to a genocide, but prejudice can go unnoticed if behaviour starts off as harmless but gradually becomes more and more extreme. This so-called “foot in the door” principle explains how we might refuse an outrageous request if it comes out of the blue, but if we are gradually drawn into a system we might end up fulfilling that same request. Stanley Milgram demonstrated this principle in the famous Milgram experiment. In the experiment, subjects were asked to inflict increasingly severe electric shocks on another participant under the pretence of assisting with an unrelated experiment. The shocks were not real, unbeknownst to the subject. The majority of subjects increased the shocks to a level that would have been lethal. However, every increase of voltage did not seem that bad compared to the previous level. If the experimenters had asked the subjects to perform a lethal shock on the other participant straight away, it is quite likely none of them would have continued. Milgram did his experiments in the 1960s, but the methods have been replicated many times since. In 2015, a similar study by Polish psychologists showed even higher levels of obedience than Milgram.

Dehumanization of homeless people In the US, a 2006 study by Harris and Fiske used brain scans to show that many people do not see homeless and substance-dependent people as real humans. When shown a picture of homeless person, areas of participants’ brains that would usually light up when seeing another person did not. In fact, areas of the brain sometimes associated with “disgust” lit up instead. In 2023, major news outlets started writing about a drug epidemic in the United States due to the spread of an animal tranquilizer called xylazine or “tranq”. Both media and government officials have been using the term “zombie drug”, due to its symptoms, such as slower breathing and skin sores. Describing substance-dependent people as “zombies” is an example of dehumanization. It allows government officials and members of the public to distance themselves from the issue and can make them feel less responsible for tackling the root causes of the issue.

Truth and reconciliation in Sierra Leone The following is a summary of a report by Rosalind Shaw, detailing the role of the truth and reconciliation commission in Sierra Leone. After an eleven-year civil war that became internationally notorious for mutilation, sexual violence, and the targeting of children, a truth and reconciliation commission (TRC) began its public hearings in April 2003. Increasingly, truth commissions are regarded as a standard part of conflict resolution “first aid kits”. Despite pressure from local NGOs and human rights activists for a TRC, there was little popular support for bringing such a commission to Sierra Leone, since most ordinary people preferred a “forgive and forget” approach. In northern Sierra Leone, social forgetting is a cornerstone of established processes of reintegration and healing for child and adult ex-combatants. Speaking of the war in public often undermines these processes, and many believe it encourages violence. In Sierra Leone’s TRC, however, sensitization materials and commissioners’ speeches promoted the healing and reconciliatory powers of verbal remembering, often explicitly discounting local understandings of healing and reconciliation in terms of social forgetting. People in both urban and rural locations were divided about the TRC, and in several communities people collectively agreed not to give statements. Before a truth commission or TRC is initiated in a particular setting, it is important to establish whether such an exercise has popular support—not only among local NGOs but also among ordinary survivors. Truth commission reports can provide crucial frameworks for debates about violence and repression, and can foster the development of stable national institutions. Sierra Leone’s Truth and Reconciliation Report offers this framework. But where there is no popular support for a truth commission, we need to find alternative ways of producing such reports. Where a truth commission or TRC is initiated, it will be more effective if it builds upon established practices of healing and social coexistence. If we discount or ignore such processes, we may jeopardize any form of social recovery.

ICC trial of Dominic Ongwen In 2016, a trial started against Dominic Ongwen, a Ugandan leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). Because Uganda is a member state of the ICC, the court’s prosecutor could start an investigation into the situation in Northern Uganda. Ongwen argued that because he was abducted and enlisted by the LRA as a young boy, he was a victim himself rather than a perpetrator. Ongwen was one of the 30–50,000 children who were abducted by the LRA. In 2021, he was sentenced for war crimes and crimes against humanity and given 25 years in prison. This included “the crime of conscripting children under the age of 15”, which meant that Ongwen was found guilty of doing upon other children what had been done to him. The plight of child soldiers has been a focus point of many organizations, from UNICEF to Save the Children. These organizations try to support the children with processing trauma and reintegrating them into society.

The UN Sustainable Development Goals The United Nations has created 17 goals with the aim of positively transforming the world, called the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). SDG 5 aims to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. The Walk Free Foundation has published a report focusing specifically on norms that perpetuate gender inequality, which manifests itself in both structural and direct violence. Some of their findings are detailed in figure 30. The report explains that “at the core of [gender] inequality is the idea that women and girls are inferior to men and boys—a mistruth that underpins their greater risk of violence, exploitation and modern slavery. Understanding the impact of the patriarchal social norms which exclude women and girls from exercising power and agency across their lifetime is ultimately necessary to ensure that no female, of any age, is left behind. Currently, no country is on track to achieve the gender equality goals set out in the 2030 SDGs”.

---

Unit 3: Development and Sustainability#

Poverty in the DRC The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of natural resources. Deposits of cobalt, coltan, copper, diamonds and gold, among other valuable materials, are estimated to be worth trillions of US dollars. However, the DRC is one of the five poorest nations in the world. According to the World Bank, in 2022, an estimated 62% of Congolese, around 60 million people, live in extreme poverty. This is partly due to the lasting impact of one of the most brutal forms of colonization experienced by the DRC. Colonization has disintegrated the very fabric of Congolese society, governance and economy lasting until the mid-20th century. The enduring impact of colonization, followed by Western backing of dictatorships in the DRC after independence, has led to weakened government institutions and little state control over resource-rich territories. Secondly, and perhaps due to its natural resource wealth, the DRC became a magnet to private mining companies and smuggling networks. Neighbouring states like Uganda and Rwanda continue to exploit resources in the DRC and smuggle them into Europe and Asia, where coltan is used in the production of technological devices like smartphones and laptops. Violence, human rights abuses, gender-based violence and environmental degradation have become widespread in mining regions, leading to displacement of communities and loss of livelihoods, such as access to land for farming. In this manner, the Congolese are deprived of the benefits of their own wealth and are made poor and vulnerable by a complex network of transnational actors and a global economy that is designed to benefit a minority. Despite receiving billions of US dollars in development aid, being home to hundreds of NGOs and one of the longest UN peacekeeping missions, the DRC still faces challenges. Critics of such international support have pointed out that these have acted as “band-aid” solutions to issues of poverty, rather than long-term solutions that address deep and persistent structural inequalities within the global economy.

Capability theory The capability theory was proposed by famous economist and Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen. The approach is based on the premise that economic development in terms of a rise in gross domestic product (GDP) does not necessarily guarantee a good quality of life for people. According to Sen, a human being’s life is a set of “doings and beings”—termed together as “functionings”. According to the theory, the focus of policy should be to ensure a person’s well-being and development, and to provide the freedom to live the kind of life they choose or find valuable. There are a range of factors that define well-being, such as health, education and political freedom. All these factors require different kinds of inputs. Some may need economic resources, and others might require a certain social structure. The capability approach was built on by Martha Nussbaum, particularly with respect to gender issues. She has argued that people across a cross-section of cultures and societies have a few basic capabilities that are required for a good life. She argues that these should be used as a guideline to inform development policy. Some of the central human capabilities as listed by Nussbaum include: ability to live a life of normal length; good health, nutrition and shelter; ability to use senses, imagine, think, reason and to have the education to realize all of these; ability to live for others and show concern for other human beings; ability to laugh and enjoy recreation.

USAID and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Both China and the US have integrated development as part of their foreign policies. The US allocates billions of dollars every year as part of its USAID overseas assistance programmes. As part of its mandate, USAID aims to “promote American prosperity through investments that expand markets for US exports”. Despite the mixed results of its programmes, USAID has fallen under criticism for promoting its agenda in developing countries by creating favourable market and political conditions that are in line with US national and corporate interests. One example of such criticism is exemplified through USAID's continued support of an organization called Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). According to hundreds of civil society actors across the continent, AGRA has harmed rather than helped farmers in sub-Saharan Africa by promoting higher agricultural yields using chemically intensive processes. USAID was accused also of increasing small farmers’ debt and their dependence on large, mostly American corporations through AGRA schemes. Similarly, China’s largest infrastructure development project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), has been instrumental in driving economic growth and reducing poverty across participating countries. However, some have questioned its motives, arguing that it is used to extend China’s influence overseas. Some argue that the BRI is used as a debt trap, in which countries indebted to China are forced to give up some of their resources due to the conditions of the BRI agreements. For example, Sri Lanka was unable to repay its debt to China for the construction of its second largest port, Hambantota Port. As a result, control of the port was granted to a Chinese company with a 99-year lease. However, some economists argue that partnering countries are equally responsible for BRI deals with China, citing that the Hambantota Port project was proposed by the Sri Lankan president, Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Conference of the Parties (COP) Since the adoption of the UNFCCC in 1996, state representatives meet annually at an international conference known as the Conference of the Parties (COP). COP is the largest annual UN conference in the world with over 25,000 attendees, from state representatives to business leaders and NGOs. Despite continued promises by state representatives to uphold the commitments made at COP, global temperatures have continued to rise. Outside the halls of the conference, it is common to see widespread protests and rallies to pressure key actors within COP to commit to the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. Hundreds of campaigners staged a walkout on the final day of COP26 in 2021, in protest of state actors’ inaction around climate change. The protest followed a talk called the People’s Declaration for Climate Justice, delivered by civil society groups. Ta'Kaiya Blaney, an environment activist from the Tla’amin Nation, told the meeting: “COP26 is a performance. It is an illusion constructed to save the capitalist economy rooted in resource extraction and colonialism. I didn’t come here to fix the agenda—I came here to disrupt it”.

Shell in Nigeria Nigeria is the largest oil producing state in Africa, with most of its GDP growth being attributed to oil production. Since the 1960s, Shell, a multinational oil and gas company, has been extracting oil and building oil transport infrastructure within the state. According to Shell (Economic Development in Nigeria: Shell Sustainability Report 2020), the company has been central to driving economic development in Nigeria, creating over 11,000 jobs directly and indirectly, generating almost a billion US dollars in tax revenues annually for the state, providing energy to communities, expanding infrastructure, contributing to social services in education and healthcare. However, the Niger Delta communities have been devastated by oil leaks and contamination as a result of Shell's operations in the area affecting drinking water, agriculture and fishing, and devastating livelihoods and the health of communities. In 2011, an independent assessment was conducted by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) in Ogoniland in the Niger Delta at the request of the Nigerian government. The assessment was paid for by Shell. The subsequent report revealed that land, ground and surface water, vegetation and air were contaminated by Shell operations, and would require 25-30 years of cleaning and rehabilitation until they are fully recovered. The National Oil Spills Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA) is a government agency operating at both national and sub-national levels under the Federal Ministry of Environment in Nigeria. Its role is to coordinate between local communities, oil companies and the government on issues related to oil spills and contamination. The UNEP report further revealed that NOSDRA lacked both the technical expertise and resources to respond effectively to oil spills. The Nigerian government was held accountable for underfunding NOSDRA and failing to regulate the oil industry, while Shell was held accountable for contaminating water sources in addition to failing to clean up the spills effectively. In 2014, Amnesty International published the No Progress report, which concluded that three years since the publication of the original UNEP study, Shell and the Nigerian government have “failed to implement recommendations made in the UNEP report and put an end to the abuse of the communities’ rights to food, water and a life free of pollution”. Amnesty has called on the Nigerian government, the British and Dutch governments, as well as Shell (who have all benefited greatly from oil extraction), to remedy the damage. Between 2015 and 2023, over 13,650 individual claims from the Bille and Ogale communities in the Niger Delta were filed against Shell at the High Court in London, where Shell headquarters is based. These included 17 civil society organizations, such as churches, schools and local NGOs (The Intercept, 2023).

US labour unions in 2022 In 2022, the number of labour union strikes across the US increased by 50%. Thousands of workers in both private and public sectors unionized and organized walkouts, strikes and protests to demand better working conditions, job security and fair wages. These efforts have been led by teachers, nurses, railway workers and employees in major US companies like Amazon and Starbucks. Protesters achieved victories in unionization despite efforts to restrict their ability to collectively bargain for fair pay and better working conditions. In September 2022, over 15,000 nurses in the state of Minnesota organized a three-day strike under the slogan “patients before profits”. The strike is considered one of the largest private sector strikes in US history, with the goal of better pay and better staffing in the healthcare system. Staffing shortages have led nurses, who are considered frontliners in the healthcare system, to work long hours in crowded hospitals for low pay. After months of negotiation with hospitals and organized action, the Minnesota Nurses Association were able to reach a collective agreement in their favour. Several hospitals agreed to pay increases and changes to nurse hiring practices to address the issue of understaffing.

Israeli development of the Naqab–Negev In January 2022, the Jewish National Fund (JNF) in coordination with the Israeli government began an afforestation project in the Naqab–Negev. The project is situated on land which is claimed by the indigenous Bedouin community in the region. The project is described as a sustainable development project which will help reduce the effects of climate change by planting trees. However, the project was met with demonstrations and strikes by Bedouins and activists who protested against home demolitions and demanded legal recognition of their villages. Many of these protests were met with police brutality and violent crackdown on protesters. According to the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (2020), “It is highly important to stress that the overall area of land that is being claimed by the Palestinian Bedouin population is estimated to be only 5.4% of the Naqab-Negev, so it is not an issue of limited resources”. Similar tactics of greenwashing have been used by MNCs to promote their products and hide the impact their production has had on local populations.

Gross National Happiness (GNH) index In 2008, Bhutan formally adopted the Gross National Happiness (GNH) index into its constitution. The index is underpinned by a holistic view of a nation’s well-being and happiness and has helped guide Bhutan's social, economic and environmental policies. The GNH Index is very different from conventional ways of measuring development and combines socioeconomic domains like living standards, along with well-being domains like cultural values, ecological diversity and spirituality. The GNH is not a ranking of subjective happiness but is a holistic measure of the population’s well-being. [T]he idea of Gross National Happiness (GNH) has influenced Bhutan’s economic and social policy, and also captured the imagination of others far beyond its borders. In creating the Gross National Happiness Index, Bhutan sought to create a measurement tool that would be useful for policymaking and create policy incentives for the government, NGOs and businesses of Bhutan to increase societal wellbeing and happiness.

Jordan and the IMF Jordan, officially the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, is a state with a population of 11 million. Over 60% of the population are under the age of 30. It is classified by the World Bank as a lower middle-income country in the Middle East. Since 1989, Jordan has developed several interactions and a largely positive relationship with the IMF and the World Bank. In 2018, following a series of IMF-mandated austerity measures and price hikes, the IMF proposed a reform of the Jordanian income tax system as part of loan conditionality. This meant that even those who were making low wages would be subjected to significant tax increases. This led to the outbreak of some of the largest protests and strikes across the country since the Arab uprisings of 2011, creating social, economic and political instability. The conditions and subsequent protests led to the resignation of the prime minister at the time. Despite the government’s adherence to IMF conditions and an ongoing largely positive relationship between the government and the IMF, public debt did not decrease. In fact, since implementing SAPs and subsequent loan conditions, such as reducing government spending, tax reforms, privatization and removal of subsidies, Jordanian debt continued to grow, increasing from a record low of US$11 billion in 2006 to US$39 billion in December 2022. On the other hand, some argue that public debt did not increase due to IMF conditionality alone, but rather due to regional instability, mismanagement of loans and external shocks like the global financial crisis of 2008 and the multiple refugee crises especially after 2011.

US–China trade war In 2018, US President Donald Trump blamed China for the increased imports and decreased exports in the US, known as trade deficits. He subsequently imposed tariffs or barriers to trade in the form of taxes on Chinese products entering the US. With China responding with similar trade barriers and tariffs, this launched a commercial conflict between the two states known as a trade war, in which each state would use its economic power to undermine the other. It is worth mentioning that since 2018, the trade wars have not reduced Chinese economic growth (as intended by the US at the time), nor did they address the issue of trade deficits in the US. Many argue that the conflict has harmed global trade, people and bilateral relations between China and the US.

Sanctions in Syria The possibility of imposing sanctions on states because of violent conflict may further obstruct their development efforts. Even though some economic sanctions are justified in the name of protecting human rights, they can have a damaging effect on a population’s standard of living, housing and access to much-needed food or medicine. For example, the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019 was a set of wide-ranging unilateral sanctions imposed on Syria by the US. These sanctions have inhibited the country's ability to produce life-saving medicine and vaccines, and have crippled the Syrian economy. Critics, including the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2020), have raised concerns that these sanctions could risk destroying any chances of recovery in Syria.

Middle Eastern refugees in Germany At the height of the refugee crisis in 2015-2016, over one million people arrived in Germany, many of whom were from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. While many European states implemented stricter border controls, Germany implemented an open-border policy to accommodate refugees. This was part of a larger plan to address the demographic crisis in Germany, which is facing an ageing population and labour shortages. To integrate refugees into German society, the government implemented various programmes including language courses and job training. The arrival of refugees has also sparked a debate in Germany about national identity and the role of the state in supporting refugee populations. Critics of the open-border policy have raised concerns about the economic and social costs of supporting refugees, while proponents argue that it is a moral obligation and a long-term investment in the German economy.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on development In 2019, the SARS-CoV-2 virus was able to spread globally within weeks due to international transportation networks, causing the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic resulted in a major disruption in the global economy, and in people's lives, livelihoods and well-being. Curfews and lockdowns impacted people’s daily life, including their ability to go to school, university or to their jobs. According to the World Bank, millions of people, especially in LICs, were pushed into extreme poverty and experienced income shocks due to loss of employment during the pandemic. Another major issue was the unfairness in vaccine distribution globally. Vaccine hoarding during the pandemic meant that rich countries kept unused vaccines and often administered third and fourth booster shots to their citizens while in the rest of the world, especially in low-income countries, vaccines were in dire shortage. In September 2021, statistics by the UNDP and the World Health Organization revealed that only 3% of the population in low-income countries globally were vaccinated, compared to over 60% fully vaccinated in the richest parts of the world. This reveals that these transnational issues tend to affect peoples and states disproportionately, adding an important dimension to the discussion on inequality and globalization. While it is difficult to think of a pandemic as being positive for development, the Happy Planet Index reported in 2021 that “life expectancy fell worldwide, but so did ecological footprint” following the outbreak.

Ecuador under Correa’s regime Rafael Correa was president of Ecuador from 2007–2017. Correa used the idea of “buen vivir socialism” to appeal to the majority of Ecuadorians. Although social spending increased and poverty decreased, some argue that Correa used buen vivir to conceal government plans to extract more oil and keep land, political power and wealth in the hands of the few. Despite starting off as a political alliance between Correa and indigenous movements within Ecuador, the government soon began drafting new laws around water and mining that contradicted aspects of buen vivir and excluded the indigenous community from the political conversation. According to critics, democratic institutions were eroded under Correa’s government, and individual freedoms and liberties were infringed upon through gag laws. The government’s aim of achieving a majority vote in most cases meant that the well-being and democratic participation of groups like women, indigenous movements and small farmers were disregarded.

---

Unit 4: Rights and Justice#

Substantive equality in Canada The territory that is now Canada had been inhabited by indigenous people since around 40,000 years ago (although this is the subject of debate). More recently, other groups have migrated to Canada, including people from Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Canada is a liberal democracy, so protection of individual rights is a strong feature of the political and legal system. However, collective rights are also protected. The Canadian constitution has provisions for the preferential treatment of underrepresented groups in some cases (for example, guaranteed seats in parliament) and identical treatment of underrepresented groups in other cases to allow them to flourish (for example, state funding for minority schools). You can find the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which forms part of the Canadian constitution, online. This is frequently cited in legal challenges through the court system. Indigenous groups in Canada (known as the First Nations) have the collective right to fish for food, social and ceremonial (FSC) purposes. This is protected under Section 35 of the Constitution. Licensed indigenous harvesters can catch what is needed for themselves and their community for FSC purposes. FSC fishing rules do not allow fishers to sell what they catch. First Nations children in Canada have their human rights protected by the child-first principle called “Jordan’s Principle”. It is named after Jordan River Anderson, a child from the Norway House Cree Nation born with multiple disabilities, who died after federal and provincial governments could not agree on which government should pay for services.

Justice in Finland In Finland, there is more focus on rehabilitation than retribution. Therefore, for minor crimes, probation and community service are often used as punishments. Sentencing criminals to a closed prison is seen as a last resort. Open prisons, where prisoners have minimal supervision, are favoured. Prisoners usually have to work and be self-sufficient by cooking and cleaning. This is seen as a better way to prepare criminals for when they rejoin society and to prevent them from committing crimes again. The lengths of prison sentences in Finland are exceptionally short compared to other countries. Life sentences are given for murder, but prisoners are given probation at the earliest opportunity, often after only 10 years. As of 2022, Finland has the lowest incarceration rate in the EU, with an estimated 51 people per 100,000 in some form of prison. This compares with 74 in neighbouring Sweden and 177 in Lithuania, which has the EU’s highest rate of incarceration. The most recently available data suggests that the reoffending rate is Finland is also very low, at 38% (United Kingdom was 48%, and in Sweden it was 61%). Violent crime is relatively rare in Finland, and guns and other weapons are tightly regulated. There have been some isolated attacks involving knives and guns and some terrorist incidents by radicalized individuals. The first recorded terrorist attack in Finland was in 2017. Finland’s traditionally soft approach to sentencing criminals has been challenged by the rise in violent extremism. Perceived issues around immigration, integration and security have led to calls for a rethink to the approach to justice. The government response was to launch the “National Action Plan for the Prevention of Violent Radicalisation and Extremism” in 2019.

Prisoner voting and the UK government Under UK law, most people over the age of 18 can vote if they are on the electoral register. However, imprisoned people are not legally allowed to vote under section 3 of 1983 Representation of the People Act. In 2001, John Hirst was serving a life sentence for manslaughter, and he claimed that section 3 was incompatible with the ECHR. A public chamber hearing was held at the Human Rights Building in Strasbourg on 16 December 2003. It was judged that the ECHR had been violated. There was serious criticism of the court from the UK government, who claimed that the court was expanding beyond the scope of the ECHR and encroaching on areas which should be left to the discretion of national governments. The UK refused to enforce the ruling from the court and a stand-off between the UK and the court started. During this period Strasbourg formally accepted that member states should be given a wider “margin of appreciation” in enforcing human rights according to their national justice traditions. In 2010, the UK government announced that it would introduce legislation to comply with the ruling, giving some prisoners the right to vote. However, this legislation was rejected in the House of Commons. This issue was resolved in 2018 when the UK government agreed to let a small number of prisoners on short sentences vote in elections. They also agreed to make it clearer to those sentenced to prison that they will forfeit the right to vote. The Council of Europe confirmed that the case was closed at its meeting in September 2018. There were wider implications brought about by this case. It promoted an increase in support for the UK leaving the EU. It also has been cited by other Council of Europe states, such as Russia and Tirkiye, as grounds for not enforcing other critical rulings.

Roma communities in Europe Six million Roma people live in the EU, and they are one of the largest ethnic minorities. The Roma people arrived in Europe in the 14th century and they are dispersed in many member states. They are traditionally itinerant people (they have a travelling lifestyle rather than having a fixed abode). They have their own language and cultural traditions. In many European states there are other groups who also have a travelling lifestyle; however, they do not identify as Roma. The World Roma Congress is a forum to discuss issues relating to the Roma people and has the goals of standardizing the Romani language, improving civil rights and education, preserving Roma culture, reparations from the Second World War (after attempts at eradicating them) and international recognition of the Roma as a national minority of Indian native origin. International Roma Day has taken place on 8 April every year since 1990. It has attempted to draw attention to discrimination directed at Roma communities globally and calls for the human rights of all to be respected and observed. However, the prejudice, hate speech and violence against the Roma people continues and in some places it has become worse.

Does ratifying human rights treaties lead to change? Professor Beth A. Simmons from the US has described the observable impact in Japan and Colombia after the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, also known as The Women’s Convention) effective since 1981. The case of Japan in summary: Japan in the 1970s and 1980s was not a natural candidate for the adoption of equal employment policies between the sexes. The Japanese government signed CEDAW after domestic pressure was applied by various women’s groups and the media. Japan ratified CEDAW on 25 June 1985. During the domestic ratification process there were many arguments and debates on the implications of CEDAW. This was Japan’s first attempt to legislate gender equality in employment. Thanks to CEDAW ratification, Japan was obliged to report to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, and it received some fairly harsh feedback in its 1994 report. This resulted in a strengthening of the domestic laws regarding equal employment. Ratification of the CEDAW also improved women's chances of successful litigation when faced with discrimination. Although there is still significant gender discrimination in the workforce in Japan and cultural attitudes have not seen significant shifts, ratification of the CEDAW made it possible to make more progress in Japan’s employment policies than would likely otherwise have been the case. The case of Colombia in summary: Colombia was one of the most conservative Catholic countries in the Western Hemisphere. Colombia ratified CEDAW on 19 January 1982. CEDAW inspired Colombian women to demand that gender equality be included in the constitutional changes of the early 1990s. Parts of the CEDAW were imported directly into the new constitution in 1991, including an explicit reference to reproductive rights. The use of international human rights language proved to be an effective strategy for introducing women’s rights into the constitution, taking advantage of the fact that Colombia is a country that is often scrutinized by the international community for its compliance with human rights principles. It has taken longer to reform laws on abortion in Colombia. However, since 2022, abortion has been freely available on request up to the 24th week of pregnancy.

Child soldiers In 1999, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 1261 unanimously. The Council condemned the targeting of children in armed conflict including the use and recruitment of child soldiers. According to the UN, over 130,000 boys and girls have been released since 1999 as a result of Action Plans mandated by the UN Security Council aimed at ending and preventing the recruitment and use of children in conflict. In 2014, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, together with UNICEF, launched a campaign called Children, Not Soldiers. The campaign received immediate support from member states, UN, NGO partners, regional organizations and the general public. At the time of the launch, the countries concerned by the campaign were: Afghanistan, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Yemen. The campaign ended at the end of 2016, but the consensus envisioned is now a reality and thousands of child soldiers have been released and reintegrated with the assistance of UNICEF, peacekeeping or political missions, as well as UN and NGO partners on the ground. National campaigns to promote the objectives of Children, Not Soldiers have been launched in most countries concerned and beyond.

Would you like me to create flashcards or a quiz for any of these case studies?

 

 

 

“Human rights can only be successfully protected at the national level.” Discuss this claim.#

 

The claim that human rights can only be protected at the national level reflects the realist perspective that the state is the primary actor in global politics and possesses the ultimate authority over its territory and people. While national governments are the primary providers of legal enforcement, a discussion of this claim reveals that domestic protection is often insufficient without international oversight and cooperation.

Arguments for National-Level Protection#

The most effective protection of rights occurs when they are codified into national law. Codification transforms aspirational human rights into enforceable legal obligations within a state's judicial system.

• State Sovereignty and Enforcement: National governments have a clear hierarchical structure and a monopoly on the legal use of force, allowing them to enforce rules through police and domestic courts. For example, Finland successfully protects rights through a justice system focused on rehabilitation rather than retribution, achieving low incarceration and reoffending rates.
• Contextual Legitimacy: Some argue that states and local institutions are better at enforcing rights because they deliver justice in line with local or national understandings, which may hold a higher level of legitimacy than standards imposed by distant intergovernmental organizations (IGOs).
• Substantive Equality: States can tailor protections to specific marginalized groups through constitutional provisions. In Canada, the constitution protects the collective rights of First Nations groups to fish for food and ceremonial purposes, a protection that is maintained and enforced at the national level.

Arguments for International and Multi-level Protection#

The primary limitation of national-level protection is that the state is often the primary violator of human rights. In such cases, international intervention and norms become essential.

• The "Foxes in the Henhouse" Problem: States with poor human rights records, such as those accused of organ harvesting or mass detention (e.g., the allegations against China regarding the Uyghur population), often use their sovereignty to deflect criticism. Without international pressure, these violations would go unchecked.
• Regional Human Rights Tribunals: Regional bodies like the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) provide a layer of protection above the state. Citizens can bring complaints to the Strasbourg Court after exhausting national appeals; its judgments are binding and can force states to change domestic laws, such as the case involving prisoner voting rights in the UK.
• Impact of Treaties: Ratifying international treaties can drive national change. The ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) led to the first gender-equality employment laws in Japan and inspired the inclusion of reproductive rights in Colombia's constitution.
• The Responsibility to Protect (R2P): This global norm posits that state sovereignty is a responsibility, not a right. If a state "manifestly fails" to protect its population from mass atrocities, the international community has a duty to intervene. This was seen in the 2011 intervention in Libya to stop violence against protesters.

Synthesis: Interdependence in Protection#

In the modern world, successful protection of human rights is rarely exclusive to one level. Instead, it relies on complex interdependence between state and non-state actors. While national governments provide the machinery for enforcement, international bodies set the benchmarks, and NGOs like Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch perform a "name and shame" function that pressures states to adhere to their obligations. The International Criminal Court (ICC) operates on the principle of complementarity, meaning it only intervenes when national courts are "unwilling or unable" to prosecute grave crimes, further illustrating how international justice acts as a backstop to national systems.

Ultimately, while the national level is the most common site of enforcement, successful protection requires a global framework of accountability to ensure that states do not use their sovereignty to shield themselves from the consequences of human rights abuses.

Would you like me to create a quiz based on these human rights case studies to help you prepare for an exam?

 

 

 

 

Major theories#

 

Based on the sources, here are the major theories and analytical frameworks presented across the units of the Global Politics course:

Unit 1: Understanding Power and Global Politics#

This unit introduces the foundational theories used to interpret state behavior and international relations.

• Realism: A state-centric theory that views the international system as anarchic.
  • Classical Realism: Argues that state behavior is driven by an inherent human nature that is selfish and competitive.
  • Structural Realism (Neorealism): Argues that the anarchic structure of the international system, rather than human nature, forces states to compete for power to ensure survival.
  • Offensive Realism: Posits that states should behave aggressively to maximize power and fill power vacuums.
  • Defensive Realism: Argues that states should maximize security rather than power, as amassing too much power can trigger counter-alliances.
• Liberalism: Emphasizes cooperation, international law, and the role of non-state actors. A key sub-theory is Complex Interdependence, which suggests that states are connected through multiple channels (economic, social, etc.) that make military force less effective.
• Social Constructivism: Argues that the international system is not objective but socially constructed through shared norms, beliefs, and discourse. It suggests that "anarchy is what states make of it".
• Critical Theories:
  • Neo-Marxism: Focuses on the global capitalist system and class conflict between the "core" (wealthy states) and "periphery" (exploited states).
  • Postcolonialism: Critiques Western-centric discourses and highlights how colonial legacies continue to shape international law and power structures.
  • Feminism: Analyzes how global politics is gendered, focusing on the exclusion of women’s experiences and the impact of patriarchy.
• Agency Theory: Explains how members of society ("principals") delegate goals to "agents" like states and NGOs, who may also pursue their own self-interests.

Unit 2: Peace and Conflict#

Theories in this unit focus on the nature of violence and models for resolving disputes.

• Galtung’s Conflict and Peace Theories:
  • Positive and Negative Peace: Negative peace is the mere absence of direct violence; positive peace is the absence of structural and cultural violence and the presence of social justice.
  • The Violence Triangle: Links direct violence (physical acts), structural violence (social injustice), and cultural violence (values that justify violence).
  • The Conflict Triangle: Analyzes conflict through three components: contradictions (incompatible goals), attitudes, and behaviour.
• Just War Theory: Provides a moral framework for judging the legitimacy of war, divided into jus ad bellum (justice of going to war) and jus in bello (justice in conduct during war).
• Conflict Resolution Models:
  • Nested Model of Conflict (Dugan): Visualizes conflict as "nested" circles ranging from immediate issues to deep systemic structures.
  • Positions, Interests, Needs (PIN): An "iceberg" model that argues resolutions require moving past visible positions to address underlying interests and fundamental human needs.
  • Conflict Escalation/De-escalation Model (Ramsbotham et al.): Includes the Hourglass Model, which maps the progression of conflict from difference to war and back toward reconciliation.
• Human Needs Theory (Burton): Suggests that conflicts involving fundamental needs (like identity and security) are non-negotiable and will persist until those needs are met.
• Greed vs. Grievance (Collier & Hoeffler): A framework for analyzing the root causes of civil wars, weighing economic motives (greed) against political/societal concerns (grievances).

Unit 3: Development and Sustainability#

These theories provide competing pathways for how societies can progress.

• Modernization Theory (Rostow): A linear model proposing that all societies pass through five stages of development, ultimately aiming for "high mass consumption".
• Dependency Theory: A critical response to modernization, arguing that poor states are trapped in a dependent relationship where they are drained of resources by wealthy states.
• Neoliberalism: Promotes free-market capitalism, deregulation, and privatization as the primary drivers of global economic growth.
• Capability Theory (Sen and Nussbaum): Argues that development should be measured by human well-being and the freedom people have to achieve "functionings" they value, rather than just GDP.
• Post-development Theory: Questions the very concept of "development" as a Eurocentric construct used to legitimize Western intervention.
• Alternative Models:
  • Degrowth: A radical theory advocating for shrinking economies to prioritize well-being and ecological health over profit.
  • Buen Vivir: An Andean indigenous worldview emphasizing community harmony with nature.

Unit 4: Rights and Justice#

This unit explores the debate between universal standards and localized interpretations of justice.

• Universalism: The belief that human rights are inalienable and apply to all people regardless of culture or nationality.
• Cultural Relativism: Argues that rights and morality must be understood within the specific context of a society’s culture and should not be dictated by universal standards.
• Rawls’ Theory of Justice: Focuses on egalitarian justice; it uses the "Veil of Ignorance" thought experiment to argue that a just society is one where rules are chosen without knowing one's own status or abilities.
• Cosmopolitan Justice: Posits that the world is a single moral community where people have obligations to all others, transcending state borders.
• Communitarianism: Emphasizes that human identities are shaped by constitutive communities and that the collective is more important than the individual.
• Vasak’s Three Generations of Rights: Categorizes rights into First-Generation (civil/political), Second-Generation (economic/social), and Third-Generation (collective/solidarity).

Would you like me to create a comparison chart between any of these specific theories, such as Realism and Liberalism?

 

 

 

To what extent does globalization always foster development?#

 

 

Whether globalization fosters development is a central debate in global politics, as the phenomenon’s impact is multidimensional and often produces contradictory outcomes. While proponents argue that globalization—defined as the increased interconnectedness and interdependence of the world’s economies, cultures, and populations—is an irresistible force for prosperity, critics contend it acts as a driver of inequality and exploitation.

Globalization as a Fosterer of Development#

Globalization can catalyze development by integrating states into the global economy and facilitating the flow of resources and knowledge.

• Poverty Reduction and Economic Growth: The expansion of free trade has allowed states to access new markets for investment, contributing to significant poverty reduction in newly industrialized countries (NICs) like China and India.
• Innovation and Technology Transfer: Globalization enables the rapid spread of innovations in medicine, sanitation, and technology, which are essential for improving human development.
• Remittances and Labor Mobility: The movement of people across borders allows migrants to send remittances back to their home countries, which can constitute a massive portion of the GDP in states like Lebanon (54%) and Tonga (44%).
• Institutional Support: Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) like the UN and EU provide platforms for South-South cooperation and frameworks that help states coordinate development policies.

Globalization as a Hindrance to Development#

Conversely, globalization often creates structural barriers that prevent development from being equitable or sustainable.

• Increasing Disparities: While the global "Top 1%" and the middle class in Asia have benefited, many in the "global bottom" are bypassed, and lower-middle-class workers in the West have seen their incomes stagnate.
• Environmental Degradation: The pursuit of development through global trade often relies on resource extraction, leading to environmental devastation, such as the oil spills in Nigeria’s Niger Delta. Furthermore, global aviation and supply chains contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.
• Vulnerability to Transnational Shocks: Increased interdependence means that a crisis in one region, such as the 2008 US financial crisis or the COVID-19 pandemic, can trigger global economic disruptions that disproportionately push populations in low-income countries (LICs) into extreme poverty.
• Dependency and Neo-colonialism: Dependency theory posits that the global economic system is structured to drain resources from "periphery" (developing) states to "core" (wealthy) states, maintaining a cycle of subordination. Some participants in global forums even describe globalization as a form of "re-colonization".

Synthesis: The "Double-Edged Sword"#

Ultimately, globalization does not always foster development because development itself is a contested concept. From a liberal perspective, globalization is viewed as a win-win situation where trade and cooperation lead to collective gains. However, critical theories like neo-Marxism and postcolonialism argue that globalization prioritizes profit over people, often leading to structural violence where marginalized groups are exploited for their labor while being denied access to the benefits of wealth. Therefore, while globalization provides the tools for development, its success depends heavily on sound government policies, effective global governance, and the mitigation of power asymmetries.

Would you like me to create a tailored report focusing on the specific ways multinational corporations (MNCs) impact development in the Global South?

 

 

Discuss the claim that the goal of parties involved in a conflict is to increase
their liberty.#

 

The claim that the goal of parties in a conflict is to increase their liberty is a significant perspective in global politics, particularly when viewing conflict through the lens of human rights and social justice. However, a comprehensive analysis of conflict dynamics, theoretical perspectives, and real-world cases suggests that while liberty is a frequent driver, it is often one of many competing goals, such as security, power, or resource acquisition.

Liberty as a Primary Goal of Conflict#

Parties often engage in conflict to secure freedoms that are being suppressed by a more powerful actor, typically the state. This can be understood through two dimensions:

• Negative and Positive Liberty: Many conflicts are fought for negative liberty—the absence of barriers or freedom from coercion, such as freedom from state surveillance or arbitrary arrest. Conversely, groups may fight for positive liberty, which is the possibility of acting as one wishes and having the control to realize one's full potential.
• Social Movements and Rights: Activists like Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela actively pursued conflict to secure civil rights and end structural oppression. Modern examples include the Women’s Suffrage movements, which contested the status quo to gain the right to vote, and the anti-extradition protests in Hong Kong, where citizens banded together to protect their legal rights and judicial independence.
• Self-Determination: For many groups, such as the Palestinian or Catalonian communities, the goal is self-determination—the liberty for a group to decide their own government and potentially form a new state.
• Liberation from Structures: Feminist perspectives often define the goal of conflict as liberation from patriarchal social norms and "sexist role patterns," aiming to empower marginalized groups.

Alternative Goals: Security, Power, and Resources#

While liberty is a frequent justification, other theoretical frameworks and conflict models suggest that parties are often driven by more pragmatic or competitive goals.

• The Realist Perspective: Realism argues that the primary goal of states is survival in an anarchic international system. In this view, states are not necessarily seeking liberty for their inhabitants but are seeking to maximize hard power and fill power vacuums to ensure their own security.
• Resource and Economic Interests: Many conflicts revolve around the competition for tangible assets like land, water, or minerals. The "Greed vs. Grievance" framework illustrates that while a party may claim to fight for liberty (grievance), they may actually be motivated by greed—the desire for economic gain from resources like oil or gas, as seen in the civil war in Yemen.
• Maintaining the Status Quo: Not all parties seek change; those currently benefiting from existing economic or social structures often engage in conflict to protect their interests and prevent the increase of liberty for others.
• Ideological Dominance: Conflicts may be driven by ideology, where the goal is not liberty but the imposition of a specific worldview or the defeat of an "incorrect" opposing belief system.

Synthesis: The Complexity of Conflict Goals#

The Positions, Interests, Needs (PIN) model suggests that what parties claim to want (their position) is often different from their underlying interests and fundamental needs.

• ** liberty as a Position:** A party may publicly state that their goal is "liberty" to gain international legitimacy or domestic support, while their underlying interest is territorial acquisition or political dominance.
• Incompatible Goals: Conflict is fundamentally defined as a pursuit of incompatible goals. In many cases, increasing the liberty of one group (e.g., indigenous land rights) may directly conflict with the interests of another (e.g., a state's desire for resource extraction), making a win-win resolution difficult.

In conclusion, while increasing liberty is a central goal for many non-state actors and social movements, it is rarely the sole objective in global politics. For many parties, goals related to power, security, and economic resources take precedence, often masking these interests under the narrative of a struggle for freedom.

Would you like me to create a comparison chart between the "Greed" and "Grievance" motivations for specific current conflicts mentioned in the sources?

 

 

 

Case Studies found in big book:#

 

Based on the second source, the following is a comprehensive list of case studies that have not been discussed in previous turns, with their full contents carbon copied as requested.

Unit 1: Understanding Power and Global Politics#

School Strike for Climate In August 2018, Swedish school student Greta Thunberg began a school strike to bring attention to climate change. At first she was alone, but soon many other young people joined her. In the weeks leading up to the Swedish elections the students sat outside the Swedish Parliament demanding that political leaders take action on the climate crisis. Her activism inspired a social movement and #FridaysForFuture started trending on social media. Although the original point was to apply pressure on Swedish politicians, this social movement soon transformed into informing and motivating young people to become involved in the climate crisis. School Strike for Climate and Fridays for Future spread globally and saw students walking out of the classroom in many countries.

A deconstruction of a political issue: the Ebola virus breakout in West Africa, 2014 In 2014, the viral disease Ebola surfaced in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. At the time this region of West Africa was already facing political instability, unstable borders, a weak health care system and poverty. Actors involved from the start: the states of Liberia, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Mali and Senegal. Stakeholders involved from the start: the people living in those states and the wider regional and global community. At first, local government health authorities in all three of the originally infected countries struggled to understand the disease, which was not unknown but incredibly rare. States with Ebola infections authorized various methods to halt the spread of the disease. Sierra Leone made residents stay home for three days, while Liberia closed most of its borders. All of these actions further crippled the states’ economies and did little to stop the spread of the disease, which quickly reached Nigeria, Mali and Senegal. Despite these and other efforts, states quickly realized they needed the support of regional IGOs, the African Union (AU) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to deal with the crisis. Additionally, states and regional IGOs sought out the support of global IGO the World Health Organization (WHO). However, these organizations were later criticized for acting too slowly. Regional and international actors: the AU, ECOWAS and the UN became involved at the request of the states originally impacted. Ebola was quickly recognized as a threat globally, and soon dominated news and social media posts around the world. Global and regional NGOs, particularly those associated with medical expertise, offered assistance, as did state actors, private actors and companies. The political issue of how to control and manage the Ebola crisis soon involved a huge range of actors too numerous to list. The WHO and multiple NGOs initially determined that Ebola was being spread through local customs and burial traditions in West Africa. In West Africa, it is customary for individuals to touch or hold their deceased loved ones before burial. However, this is when Ebola is most contagious. According to Guinea’s Ministry of Health, 60 per cent of Ebola’s cases were linked to traditional burial practices and the WHO estimated that 80 per cent of cases in Sierra Leone were tied to burial practices. As a result, these types of burial practices were banned, causing huge upset and mistrust within local communities. Then, in 2014, the NGO Médecins Sans Frontières (or Doctors Without Borders) had to stop working in a treatment centre in Guinea after its members were attacked by those who believed that the organization had brought the virus with them. Health care workers from within West Africa also took great risks in helping those infected with Ebola and suffered violent attacks by community members who viewed them with suspicion. Additionally, many community stakeholders began to question whether the virus was real, and misinformation quickly spread. As a result of these experiences, some experts have concluded that respecting community stakeholders should be the key to controlling any kind of disease outbreak. As the crisis evolved, a priority was placed on making burials safe and dignified, but was it too little too late?. Health care actors: alongside local health care workers in West Africa, the WHO and state health agencies including the US Center for Disease Control and NGOs such as Médecins Sans Frontières (also called Doctors Without Borders) became involved in the crisis. Additionally, volunteer health care workers from many other countries offered assistance to Ebola clinics in West Africa. The media: the global media began reporting on the crisis as it evolved. Eventually Ebola was brought under control and West Africa was declared Ebola-free in May 2015, after over 11,000 people lost their lives.

---

Unit 2: Rights and Justice#

The Rohingya crisis In 2017, massive-scale violence and serious human rights abuses forced the Rohingya people, a minority ethnic group, to escape from their homes in Myanmar. Thousands fled by sea to Bangladesh. It is estimated that at one time almost a million Rohingya people found temporary safety in the Cox’s Bazar Region of Bangladesh, which was, at that time, home to the world’s largest refugee camp.

Stateless people It might surprise you to know that there are millions of people who are denied a nationality in the world today. How could this happen?.

1. The most common reason is that they were born into a country where the state discriminates against their race, ethnicity, religion, language or gender. The laws in several countries do not allow women to pass on nationality to their children. For example, in Malaysia, if a father denies the child or dies, the children can be left stateless.
2. A child born to illegal migrants may be denied citizenship and left stateless.
3. Some countries revoke citizenship for those who have lived outside the country for an extended period.
4. Sometimes people fleeing war or conflict may lack identity papers proving their nationality and are therefore considered stateless.
5. Many stateless people pass this condition on to their children.

Challenges to constitutional law: Roe v. Wade The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest tribunal for all cases arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. The Court’s purpose is to give the American people equal justice under law and it also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution. In 1970, a Texas woman, referred to as Jane Roe (not her real name), launched a lawsuit against a Texas district attorney, Henry Wade, demanding that women have the right to a safe and legal abortion. The case made its way to the US Supreme Court where, in 1973, it was decided that women in the United States had a fundamental right to choose to have an abortion. This right became constitutional law and therefore applied to all women in all US states. However, this ruling was extremely controversial and faced opposition from those with conservative and religious world views. Anti-abortion activists argued that a foetus also had a constitutional right to life. In contrast, those in favour of the ruling, often described as ‘pro-choice’, argued that denying women the right to an abortion was a violation of their individual liberties. After decades of lobbying and activism, the Supreme Court, in June 2022, reversed its 1973 decision. This meant that individual states in the US could now make their own laws regarding abortion. Following the reversal, many states immediately introduced bans or severe restrictions on abortion.

The United States (alleged violations of human rights) Alleged violation: The United States has been widely criticized for its post 9/11 ‘war on terror’. In 2022, the Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs at Brown University in Boston, in collaboration with Human Rights Watch, released a report stating that the CIA had secretly detained at least 119 Muslim men and tortured at least 39. The military also allegedly held thousands of Muslim men, and in some cases boys, in detention centres, including in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Nearly 800 men and boys were held in Guantánamo, and 39 remain detained as of 2023, 27 without criminal charges. Cases of US-facilitated indefinite detention continued under the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. Response of the state to claims they are violating the treaty: Many activists and groups, both inside and outside the United States, have called for an investigation into the actions of the CIA. President Donald Trump used his first TV interview as president in 2017 to say he believes torture ‘absolutely’ works and that the United States should ‘fight fire with fire’. On 26 June 2023, in honour of The International Day of Support for Victims of Torture, President Biden stated: It is our firm belief as a nation that we must hold ourselves to the same standards to which we hold others. This is why we continue to ensure that torture remains prohibited in all of its forms, without exception. The statement then goes on to condemn Russia, Syria and North Korea but makes no mention of allegations of torture conducted by the United States.

Libya and humanitarian intervention The Arab Spring was a series of anti-government protests, uprisings and armed rebellions that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s. In February 2011, a violent crackdown was launched against protesters in Libya. An estimated 500–700 people were killed over several weeks as the government, led by Muammar Gaddafi, used the military to respond with force. In response to these attacks, the UN Security Council invoked R2P, authorizing ‘humanitarian intervention’ to protect civilians. NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) then launched a military operation, including airstrikes, aimed at Gaddafi’s forces. While the intervention was successful in helping the rebel forces topple Gaddafi’s regime, it resulted in a power vacuum and a protracted period of instability and civil war in Libya. Many have criticized the intervention, arguing that it went beyond its mandate of protecting civilians and instead focused on regime change. Others argue that the intervention was necessary to prevent a massacre of civilians.

Collective indigenous rights Indigenous people are distinct social and cultural groups who share collective connections to the land and natural resources where they live, or once lived. The land and resources are linked to the indigenous people’s identities, cultures and spiritual beliefs. They often have their own leadership systems and maintain a distinct identity from the wider society. Different general terms and specific names are used to describe indigenous people in different areas of the world.

---

Unit 4: Peace and Conflict#

Migrant labour as direct and structural violence In some parts of the world, particularly in Middle Eastern countries (for example, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar) and in south-east Asian countries (for example, Malaysia, Singapore and China), legal structures are put in place by governments to make it easier for employers to exploit migrant workers. They provide a large supply of cheap labour to foster significant economic growth and provide cheap domestic labour in the form of cleaning, cooking and childcare. Some people argue that this is positive, as migrant workers are able to send remittances back home to their families. However, the system is becoming more and more controversial and more people see it as exploitation. In countries where migrant labour is most popular, there are not many regulations and protections for migrant workers. They often face low pay, bad working conditions and mistreatment from employers. Racial discrimination and gender-based violence are common. The Kafala system is a programme in some Middle Eastern countries where the government gives local people or businesses permits to hire foreign workers. The sponsor is responsible for the workers’ travel expenses and living arrangements. These can range from shared living spaces similar to dorms or, for domestic workers, living in the sponsor’s house. Typically, this system falls under the management of departments dealing with domestic affairs, not those dealing with labour issues. As a result, the workers often do not receive protection from the host country’s labour laws. There have been reports of employers taking away passports, visas and mobile phones, and restricting domestic workers to their homes. Workers have to rely on their sponsors to stay in the country legally. However, their status can be revoked by the sponsors for any reason, which puts the labourers at the sponsors’ risk. This gives the sponsors a lot of power, which can be misused. We can therefore see the Kafala system as a structure of violence. There is not a single individual that is responsible for the violence. Instead, it is a system that puts structures in place that cause inequality and discrimination. In addition to structural violence, the Kafala system creates direct violence. Because of structural violence, employers have the means to engage in direct acts of violence towards workers, for example physical abuse, or causing sleep deprivation, hunger or exhaustion from overwork.

Conflict parties and the 2023 civil war in Sudan The primary parties of the 2023 conflict are the Sudan military government, the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The conflict began with airstrikes and gunfire attacks by the paramilitary RSF on government sites. In 2019, former President Omar al-Bashir was overthrown and replaced by the joint leadership composed of the leader of the RSF, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (better known as Hemedti), and the Sudanese military chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. Hemedti agreed to take on the role of Deputy Leader and support Burhan as military chief and ruler of Sudan. The current conflict resulted from discussions regarding the merging of Hemedti’s RSF into the national army. This was supposed to be a key step in reinstating the civilian governance of Sudan and determining the power structure in the newly formed hierarchy and who should report to whom. As explained, there are times when conflict can grow out of disagreements from within a primary party to conflict. Once allies in their opposition to former President Omar al-Bashar, the two primary parties in this conflict are now the SAF and the RSF or, more precisely, Hemedti and Burhan. It is clear that these groups are the primary disputants and that control of the government and leadership of the country are the direct and clear stakes at the heart of the outcome. Although it has not always been clear, allies or secondary parties of the RSF seem to be the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia. The RSF also has good relations with Yemen because Hemedti sent thousands of his RSF mercenaries to Yemen to fight on the government’s behalf during its civil war against the Yemenese Houthi rebels allied with Iran. The indirect benefit the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Yemen may experience if Hemedti is victorious in the conflict is that he may engage in preferential trade and diplomatic relations with them as thanks for supporting him in his rise to power. In terms of third parties in the conflict in Sudan, at the time of writing, there have been attempts by the United States to broker temporary ceasefires to get supplies to those who need them or get individuals out of the country. In addition, the United Nations, as well as many countries throughout the world, have called for ceasefires.

Who needs a military? One of the perspectives that is sometimes neglected in peace and conflict studies is whether a military is even necessary. Costa Rica is one of the few countries in the world that does not have a standing army. After the civil war in 1948, the Costa Rican government became the first country in the world to abolish the military, creating the Public Force of Costa Rica. It is divided into three branches: the Civil Guard, the Rural Guard and the Air Force. The Civil Guard is responsible for general law enforcement, while the Rural Guard is responsible for patrolling the borders and dealing with illegal immigration. The Air Force is responsible for search and rescue and providing air support to the other branches of the Public Force. Costa Rica’s abolition of the military reflected its commitment to peace and non-violence. It showed that it believed a standing army was unnecessary to defend the country and that the Public Force would be sufficient to maintain law and order. There was also the practical matter of the costs of maintaining a military, which it was also seeking to avoid. But what if another country attacked Costa Rica?. What would happen?. First, it is important to understand that Costa Rica has had no involvement in any international military conflict since the mid-1850s, so conflict involving another state is unlikely. However, Costa Rica is a member of the Organization of American States (OAS), which has a mutual defence treaty. This means that if another country attacked Costa Rica, the other members of the OAS would be expected and obligated to come to Costa Rica’s defence. Costa Rica is also a member of the regional Rio Security Treaty, which the United States is a part of. The United States also has a long history of military cooperation with Costa Rica, so in the event of an attack on Costa Rica, the United States would likely provide military assistance.

Inter- and intrastate conflicts Ethiopia: In November 2020, the internationalized civil conflict between the government of Ethiopia and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) broke out, resulting in hundreds of thousands of civilian and combatant deaths. Tigrayans have attempted to establish an independent state as far back as the 1200s. In 1991, the TPLF overthrew the government and took control of the capital of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa. The TPLF’s removal from power in 2018 led to tension between it and the central government, and by 2020, they were at war. While a ceasefire agreement was signed in November 2022, there continue to be instances of conflict between the two sides that threaten the peace. What made this conflict an ‘internationalized’ civil war was the involvement of the Eritrean military acting on the side of the Ethiopian government. Ukraine: In contrast, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is likely the best current example of an interstate conflict. Russia initiated a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Like the intrastate conflict in Ethiopia, this war has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, and also the largest flow of refugees within Europe since the break-up of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. President Putin’s ambitions in Ukraine include a desire to gain both territorial and governmental control. However, Ukraine has mounted a strong and sustained defence, and there are increasing suggestions that this may become a protracted war that may very well end in some form of a stalemate.

The Nested Model of Conflict and the civil war in Yemen Let’s use the civil war in Yemen as an example of how the Nested Model of Conflict can be applied. The issue or immediate cause of the conflict was the takeover of Sanaa, the capital, by the Houthi rebels in 2014. This was a reflection of a long-standing relational conflict between the Houthi (mostly Shia Muslims) and the Yemeni central government (predominantly composed of Sunni Muslims). Many sub-systemic structures may have influenced the issues and relational conflicts. However, two examples are the weak government structure and the weak economic structures, which included Yemen being one of the poorest countries in the Middle East, with unemployment, food insecurity and lack of resources contributing to economic discontent. Finally, the broader structural dynamics included the cultural-religious divide between Shia and Sunni Muslims and historical influences, including the fact that Yemen was composed of two separate nations (North and South Yemen) before its unification in 1990. This unification attempted to bring together different political systems and cultures. Using the Nested Model of Conflict, we can see how immediate issues (like the takeover of the capital) are deeply tied to long-standing relational conflicts (such as religious and political tensions). These relational conflicts are influenced by sub-systemic factors (like economic challenges) and broader systemic structures (like regional religious dynamics).

UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has been plagued by a series of conflicts involving various rebel groups, ethnic tensions and struggles over the country’s vast mineral wealth. The United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), originally established as MONUC in 1999 and later renamed in 2010 with an updated mandate, is one of the largest and longest-standing UN peacekeeping missions. Its main objectives have been to protect civilians, support the government’s stabilization and peace consolidation efforts, and ensure the implementation of the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework for the DRC and the region. MONUSCO has made progress in protecting civilians from violence, particularly in areas with active conflicts. The mission has also played a key role in the disarmament and demobilization of several rebel groups. MONUSCO provided logistical and security support during the DRC’s elections, helping ensure a relatively peaceful electoral process. Interestingly, MONUSCO was the first UN peacekeeping mission authorized to use surveillance drones so that real-time intelligence could be provided to help enhance the protection of civilians. Nevertheless, MONUSCO has also faced its challenges. The DRC’s large size and challenging geography, combined with limited infrastructure, have made it difficult for peacekeepers to access and operate in many areas. There are also many different armed groups that have complicated disarmament efforts and the overall stabilization of the country. MONUSCO has also been plagued by peacekeepers facing accusations of misconduct, including sexual exploitation and abuse. In some cases, the mission’s cooperation with the Congolese national army, which has also been accused of human rights abuses, has posed legitimacy challenges.

R2P in action Myanmar: The government of Myanmar had failed Pillar I of the R2P doctrine by not protecting its population. There had been government-led discrimination against the Rohingya by denying them a right to citizenship since at least 1982. In addition, there were restrictions on marriages and reproductive rights, as well as restrictions on religious and economic freedoms. The government had also limited access to much-needed humanitarian assistance. These policies perpetuated an environment where other groups within Myanmar and the military were encouraged to abuse and discriminate against the Rohingya. Despite all of the warning signs, the international community failed to address the abuses faced by the Rohingya. After the ‘clearance operations’ by the Tatmadaw (military of Myanmar) in August 2017, when over 700,000 Rohingya fled Myanmar to escape acts of genocide being committed against them, there was limited response by the international community. Initially, some sanctions were imposed by the governments of the United States, Canada, the EU and Australia, but little otherwise. In 2022, Gambia stepped in when other international powers would not and brought the case of the genocide to the International Court of Justice. Côte d’Ivoire: In Côte d’Ivoire, violence escalated after the presidential elections in November of 2010 between then-President Gbagbo and Alassane Ouattara. Gbagbo had refused to accept defeat, and violence broke out, with supporters of both men attacking communities based on ethnic identity and perceived political support. The African Union and ECOWAS both suspended Côte d’Ivoire’s membership. They sent mediation teams to Côte d’Ivoire seven times, and the United States and EU imposed sanctions on members of Gbagbo’s government. R2P was also invoked in statements by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN’s special advisers on preventing genocide. After a five-day operation, Gbagbo surrendered. This was widely considered an effective application of R2P.

The Canadian Truth and Reconciliation A good example of a relatively recent TRC (the final report was submitted in 2015) was the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established in 2008 as part of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement. The goal of the Canadian TRC was to acknowledge the history and legacy of the residential school system, which for over 100 years forcibly removed indigenous children from their families and communities and placed them in government-funded, church-run schools. The purpose of these schools was to assimilate indigenous children into Euro-Canadian culture. The Canadian TRC reflected the key features of truth and reconciliation commissions and its role as a peacebuilding mechanism. Fact-Finding: over its six-year mandate, the TRC held events across Canada where survivors shared their experiences. The Commission collected statements from over 6,500 witnesses, revealing the truth about the residential school system and its terrible impacts. Recommendations: In its final report, the TRC issued 94 ‘Calls to Action’ aimed at addressing the legacy of the residential schools and promoting reconciliation. These calls to action included recommendations for policy changes in areas such as education, health, child welfare and justice. Reconciliation: The TRC emphasized the importance of building a new relationship between indigenous and non-indigenous Canadians based on mutual respect and understanding.

Would you like me to create a comparison chart between the Canadian and Sierra Leonean Truth and Reconciliation Commissions?