Search Results

This short introduction describes the approach taken by the book and gives a brief outline of its contents. The story is about wars and military occupation, and the ideas underlying them, and the search for these ideas is carried out in the domain of the laws of war by addressing the challenge posed by a particular principle in these laws: the distinction between combatant and non-combatant, a concept which has been recognized as the fundamental principle upon which the entire notion of ‘humanity in warfare’ rests (and has also been acknowledged as the most fragile). The forces underpinning this distinction (more precisely, a distinction between the lawful and unlawful combatant) are explored by presenting three ideologies, each representing a distinct political tradition of war, and each rooted in incommensurable conceptions of the good life; the overall argument of the book is that this incommensurability lay at the source of the failure fully to resolve the problem of distinction between lawful and unlawful combatants between 1874 and 1949. The book makes use of concepts and methods borrowed from a range of intellectual disciplines: political thought, history, and the ‘classical’ traditions of international theory. In the case of the latter, it examines the influence of key thinkers on war, such as Machiavelli, Grotius, and Rousseau, but differs from this orthodox approach in two ways: first, it is not seeking to ascertain the ‘true’ meaning of their philosophies, but rather to find how their political thoughts were interpreted and shaped by later generations; second, the examination is not restricted to abstract theorists and philosophers but is centrally concerned with paradigms constructed by practitioners of war, both professional and civilian.

Arendt's apparent exclusion of violence from politics — her definitionally-enforced distinction — actually linked politics and war together in a historically and conceptually rich relationship. She criticized the dominant Western traditions of social and political thought for borrowing their models of politics from the realm of organised violence, of command and obedience. But it is her political thought that is deeply influenced by the enduring significance of war. It may be necessary now, more than ever, to learn how to think with Arendt, a time that has delivered us moral and political catastrophes, which while not exceeding her day, strongly resemble and are directly linked to those she directly confronted. Postcolonial conflicts, revolutions and occupations, wars of annihilation and crimes against humanity, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and accusations of Islamo-fascism — these are among the social forces relating and separating peoples and states through organised violence.

This is the second of three chapters that set out the differing contexts through which the dilemma in the laws of war over the distinction between lawful and unlawful combatants can be viewed: political and diplomatic (Chapter 1), social (this chapter) and intellectual (Chapter 3). It explores the social history of army occupation and resistance to it in nineteenth century Europe – from the Napoleonic period to the Franco-Prussian war– and places these diplomatic failures in their broader social and political context. In particular it examines the range of army practices under occupation, and the effect that they had on civilian life. The different sections of the chapter discuss: pillaging, looting, requisitions and billeting; reprisals; hostage-taking; types of civilian behaviour –obedience to the occupier, political and armed acts of resistance, organized acts of resistance –guerrillas and franc-tireurs; levee en masse and other assorted insurrections; ideologies of resistance; religion as a source of resistance; and the influence of nationalism and patriotism.

Despite the conceit that transitional administration was invented in the 1990s, much can be learned concerning the development of an institutional capacity to administer territory from examining the manner in which the colonial empires were regulated and subsequently dismantled. An age less attuned to political sensitivities also provides a clearer‐eyed assessment of the requirements of such administration, challenging the conventional wisdom that ‘ownership’ on the part of the local population is essential to the process.

introduces the term ‘international administration’ and distinguishes it from peacekeeping, state- and nation-building, and military occupation. Also discusses the political and strategic context out of which international territorial administration emerged in the mid-1990s. An increase in the importance that many states attach to humanitarian norms as matters of international concern and a marked disregard for sovereignty as a barrier to humanitarian interference have facilitated the pursuit of policies of a highly intrusive nature, including the establishment of international administrations. States have also been motivated by considerations of national interest: a strong international presence in the Balkans and in East Timor has served to buffer regional states from the effects of instability, notably refugee flows and trans-border crime. The chapter concludes with an overview of the contents of the book.

This chapter documents the views of Muhammad Rushdi's brother regarding the path that Muhammad took. The brother said that there several reasons that would lead a guy like Muhammad Rushdi to take the decision to be a fighter. He spoke of Muhammad as being bored of prison. And like any good Muslim, he wanted to go to Paradise. There was also the occupation. People watched their friends being beaten or killed, and he wanted to save them. He wanted to do good things for the people.

By the end of the Geneva negotiations in 1949, significant progress had been made in the codification of the laws of war, although the question of the legal distinction between lawful and unlawful combatants remained essentially unresolved. The book has outlined both the conceptual and practical historical contexts within which this problem was confronted, and in doing so has offered an explanation of its intractability, its argument being that three fundamentally divergent philosophies of war that cannot be reconciled lie at the heart of the problem. A number of central and important themes have been identified: (1) the book has underlined that in situations of war or military occupation, many of the traditional dichotomies in both international relations theory and political theory are lost; (2) from the perspective of international law, in contrast with the conventional depiction of the legal arena as an exclusive instrument for advancing and reconciling state interests, the analysis has shown that legal systems are also (and perhaps primarily) the expressions of ideological norms and values; and (3) the importance of ideological traditions has been demonstrated. Finally, in its treatment of the themes of war and military occupation, a number of points have been highlighted: (1) the opaque nature of occupation in nineteenth-century Europe; (2) the existence of a powerful custom of civilian resistance to occupation, not even accounted for by the makers of the laws of war; (3) the impossibility of maintaining a distinction between the public and private spheres under occupation; (4) the incoherence of a Groatian formulation in the face of such army practices as reprisal (a martialist policy); and (5) the explicit emergence of patriotism and nationalism in these situations. These points demonstrate that it was hardly surprising that the attempt to introduce a distinction between lawful and unlawful combatants failed, and show that the essential truth oaboutwars of military occupation and conquest is captured in the opposition between martial and republican paradigms.

Argues that the process of building democracy in Romania is dependent on a favourable external environment and active support from abroad. However, Romania has benefited far less from external efforts to promote democracy than most other ex‐Warsaw Pact States. The chapter points to some of the reasons of the retarded progress of democratization in Romania, such as a historical legacy of foreign occupation and sharp internal economic, cultural, and ethnic cleavages. The communist regime's determination to retain absolute control over politics and society and oppose any liberal initiatives in economics blocked off the possibility of any democratic transition. The activity of anti‐reformers described as ‘nomenklatura nationalists’ also contributed to the weakness of democratic consolidation in Romania. They demonstrated their ascendancy by blocking economic reforms between 1989 and 96, with the support of Russia, which sought to make Romania dependent on Russia's cheap energy supplies in return for political compliance. The author makes a case for a new approach to democracy building from domestic reformers and international organizations that recognizes Romania's special problems and pursues realistic targets.

Scrutinizes the notion that patterns of school-to-work transitions in Europe can be characterized by a dichotomy between an occupational labour market (OLM) model, where entry jobs are closely linked to young people’s specialized vocational training, and an internal labour market (ILM) model that results from a more significant role of labour market experience and seniority in matching processes. Empirically, the country clustering conforms to the OLM–ILM dichotomy insofar as entry patterns in Continental Europe with extensive vocational training systems differ from those of Northern European countries lacking such systems. Southern European countries differ systematically from both patterns, however, and indicate that transition patterns are not determined by the structure of training systems alone but result from the interaction of educational systems and labour market institutions.

Uses panel data modelling to assess the impact of structural change on market entrants' risk of unemployment and patterns of occupational allocation in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s. Youth unemployment rates are shown to have closely followed aggregate economic conditions with only slight impact from demographic factors. Changing occupational outcomes are more dependent on the relative evolution of educational expansion and occupational upgrading, however. In particular, labour market problems of low qualified leavers have empirically resulted from both the economic recession of the early 1990s and continued occupational upgrading in the labour market.

Introduces the book's main argument: that it is too simple, and ultimately misleading, to say that SCAP (that is, General MacArthur and officers of the American Occupation) “imposed” a Constitution on postwar Japan. Rather, in this book, Japan is treated as a case study of democratization. The chapter also introduces the principal players (MacArthur, Whitney, and Kades on the American side; Shidehara, Yoshida, and Kanamori on the Japanese side). It then describes, in terms that invite comparison with other cases of democratization, the main features of the context (cultural, social, economic, and international) in which they worked to lay the foundation for constitutional democracy.

It is argued that there are compelling reasons why we should be heading towards a fundamental incompatibility between the cherished goal of equality and the equally cherished goal of full employment. If this is so, we shall have left the epoch of the democratic class struggle and, possibly, regressed to a world dominated by the ‘social question’ and social polarization. These compelling reasons can be summarized under two labels: the first is globalization and technology, both of which undoubtedly enrich all nations, although in the process, they also accelerate industrial decline and contribute to unemployment; the second is tertiarization, which favours those with human and social capital, but which also may cause stagnation because of low productivity. In any case, both reasons point in the same direction: the less skilled are likely to become losers—be it as unemployed, or as low‐paid workers. The different sections of the chapter are: Jobs and Unemployment Trends Across Welfare Regimes; The Dilemmas of Globalization and Technological Change; Dilemmas of the New Service Economy; Identifying Services; Service Sectors; Service Occupations; Lousy Jobs or Outsiders? — post‐industrial job trends towards service job growth; The Cost‐Disease and Service Expansion; The Micro‐Foundations of Post‐industrial Employment; and The New Keynesian Household.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) began to develop in Palestine after the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, but only a few of these can be considered peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs). P/CRO growth was hindered by the culture of antagonism with Israel, the neopatriarchal structure of Palestinian society and the autocracy of the Palestinian Authority, and the Israeli occupation's stifling effect on civil society, and many Palestinians have preferred armed resistance. P/CROs were usually internally democratic; ideology played an important role in success or failure, most relied on international funding, and all either regarded themselves as complementing the Palestinian Authority or monitoring it. P/CRO activities included human rights advocacy, the representation of Palestinian interests to the international community, and domestic consciousness raising. However, the P/CRO contribution to peace building has been insignificant, and the true Palestinian “peace camp” is the Palestinian Authority.

The chapter analyzes the interaction of American Military Occupying authorities in Germany and Japan with indigenous stakeholders in the steel industry. German and Japanese steel industries are radically recomposed through processes of creative reflection and interaction among all the players

Engagement with American practices and ideas in the period after the Second World War differed in Germany and Japan compared to in many of the other political economies considered in this volume, because both were militarily occupied countries. Thus, in addition to the diffusion (or in any case, incursion) of American industrial ideas, principles of organization, and technologies by way of markets, scholarly and technical writings, and elite circulation, American ideals were also imposed on Germany and Japan by military governors during the first decade after the war. By analysing the process of restructuring in the steel industries in both occupied countries, this chapter examines the complexity of the notion of ‘imposition’ in the context of this military occupation. The main argument is that the American occupation dramatically changed both societies by forcing them to grapple with American ideas of social, industrial, and political order.