Evolving structure of collective bargaining in Turkey (1990–2005)

ABSTRACT

Following the June 1967 Six-Day War, the Soviet Union and Britain invested significant efforts in rehabilitating their relations with the Arab countries, notably Egypt. While both supported the withdrawal of Israel from the Arab-occupied territories, the two countries differed over the nature of the settlement. Still, at the UN Security Council, the Soviet Union supported the British draft resolution for solving the Middle East conflict. Cold War interests and competition over influence in the Middle East, however, led the Soviets to launch a public campaign against British policy in the Middle East and prevented the two countries from joining efforts to bring about a breakthrough in the Arab–Israeli conflict.     

The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan: International Reactions,Military Intelligence and British Diplomacy

From the outset the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was strongly condemned by Britain and all the other NATO member states, by the non-aligned group and by key countries in Asia and the Middle East. During the first days following the invasion, London worked for the speedy build-up of a diplomatic consensus, while the Carter administration was still in a state of surprise and some confusion. It is evident that the single factor that led many countries to join forces diplomatically was the fear of further Soviet adventurism in Asia and the Middle East; uninformed, alarmist assessments of Soviet intentions played a major part in cementing a diplomatic coalition, which led to the condemnation of Moscow in the UN General Assembly – predictably, the Soviets had vetoed a Security Council resolution. Simply put, the fear of war led to something of a panic among non-aligned nations, which in turn convinced them to back western diplomacy.     

Arms transfer and the Asia‐Pacific region

Asia's share in total global arms imports has been increasing annually. Since 1988, it has exceeded that of the Middle East, making this region the second largest arms market after Europe. Professor Takahiro Shinyo of the Osaka School of International Public Policy notes that new threat perceptions, sources of regional instability, and modernization drives by ASEAN militaries have created an Asia‐Pacific imperative for greater transparency, self‐restraint, and cooperation in the security field. He warns that dialogue alone will not suffice and proposes concrete measures to stem the arms flow, including full ARF participation in the UN Conventional Arms Register.     

The Russian-U.S. Military balance in the post-cold War Asia-Pacific region and the “China Threat”

The United States and the Soviet Union/Russia have undertaken major arms reduction in the Asia-Pacific region since the late 1980s, but they have not withdrawn from the region. The United States and Russia will maintain greater military forces than any other countries in the region. China has increased its military strength steadily due to its booming economy. However, Chinese military modernization has been modest compared with other countries in the region and its rapidly growing economy. China focuses on economic development; it is not filling the “power vacuum” because there is no such vacuum left in the Asia-Pacific region.     

越南李朝兵制与唐宋兵制关系探析

兵制是一个国家的重要典章制度,同时也是维护国家独立和民族繁荣的有效手段。李朝作为11至13世纪中南半岛上的强国之一,十分重视兵制的建设。由于中越复杂的历史联系,李朝立国后在兵制的设置上借鉴了唐宋兵制,尤其是重点效仿唐宋兵制的军事领导体制、武装力量体制和兵役制度等军事制度。不过,李朝兵制并没有完全照搬唐宋兵制,它既吸收了唐宋兵制的精华,又因地制宜地发展出了符合李朝自身国情的兵制,并增设了新的兵种"象兵"。李朝兵制无论是在平定内乱抑或开疆扩土中,都契合了国家发展的实际需要。反过来,李朝兵制也对宋朝的兵制产生了一定的影响,宋朝也参考了李朝兵制对其兵制进行改革。宋朝兵制在改革中充分借鉴了李朝的军事编制,尤其是"军"这种新的军队编制的创设,成为宋朝改革军队编制的开端。从李朝兵制大力效仿唐宋兵制,再到宋朝亦在兵制建设上借鉴李朝兵制的优点,这种相互学习与借鉴,增进了古代中国与周边国家的关系,也进一步促进了二者之间的相互交融和融合,从而形成了今天的中国与周边国家的文化中你只有我、我中有你的文化格局。     

特朗普时期美朝关系变化轨迹与未来走向

特朗普就任美国总统以来,美朝关系经历了对抗与危机时期、缓和与蜜月时期以及僵持时期三个阶段。在对抗与危机时期,美国对朝采取经济制裁、军事演习等极限施压举措;在缓和与蜜月时期,美国对朝采取首脑峰会、工作磋商的接触政策;在僵持时期,美国对朝"谈压并举"。新冠肺炎疫情也没有给美朝关系改善提供机会之窗。而贯穿始终的是美国对朝制裁毫不放松。特朗普本人及其幕僚对奥巴马政府的对朝政策十分不满,积极应对突飞猛进的朝鲜核导技术,掌握在东北亚地缘战略竞争中的主导权。这成为特朗普政府对朝政策的动因。特朗普政府对朝政策推动了无核化谈判的展开和朝鲜半岛局势的缓和,但美朝无核化谈判依然陷入梗阻。     

Changing Global Landscape and Enhanced US Engagement with Asia—Challenges and Emerging Trends

United States President Barack Obama's announcement of significant shifts in US polices towards the Middle East and East Asia in 2009 has affected the global strategic landscape. President Obama's announcement of enhanced US engagement with Asia has posed certain challenges to the prevailing regional architecture of ASEAN centric institutions and ASEAN centrality which has fostered peace and stability, and prosperity in the region. The rise of China and its growing political and economic influence in the region and its military modernisation have aroused US concern that a rising China could in the future challenge its primacy in the Asia region. President Obama's announcement of a web of military alliances of treaty allies and strategic partners with the stationing of US marines in Darwin in November 2011 was perceived by China as an attempt by the US to contain China or constrain its rise. ASEAN is uneasy about any emergence of big power rivalry in the region.     

Oil,War and European Initiatives for Peace in the Middle East 1973–74: British Attitude and Perspective

The Arab–Israeli wars since 1948 resulted in several peace treaties between Israel and its neighbours brokered by the US, the Soviet Union and European countries in an attempt to achieve a just and lasting peace settlement in the Middle East. All efforts however proved ultimately futile, with the resumption of war several years after each peace treaty had been signed. For example, after the Six Day War of 1967, all parties agreed to accept a peace treaty based upon United Nations Resolution 242. However, six years after the tabling of the resolution, war broke out again on October 1973. Another long process of peace settlement ensued which culminated in the Camp David Accords, brokered by President Jimmy Carter. These peace accords, signed between President Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Menachem Begin of Israel on 17 September 1978, led directly to the Israel–Egypt Peace Treaty of 1979. Despite its success, the 1979 treaty yet again failed to achieve the just and lasting peace settlement that had been expected. In all these treaties, the core issues of the conflict, such as the Palestinian refugee problem and the status of East Jerusalem, failed to be resolved. This article examines the British attitude and perspective towards the peace settlement after the 1973 war, focussing on the proposal for an International Peace Guarantee and the initiative of the Euro-Arab Dialogue. Based upon declassified archival records of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office available at the National Archives in England, it unveils the attitude of the British government towards the UN Resolutions as well as its collective initiatives with the European Community to establish a just and lasting peace settlement in the Middle East.     

US Technological Competition with China: The Military,Industrial and Digital Network Dimensions

The US approach toward China shifted from engagement to competition, and it has coincided with the near-simultaneous breakthrough of advanced technologies in a whole host of areas ranging from artificial intelligence to synthetic biology. As a result, the United States is competing with China to apply these advanced technologies for military and industrial purposes, and, at the same time, competing in third countries over dominance in digital network infrastructure. The current article will illustrate Chinese efforts and US countermeasures that are unfolding in the form of military technological competition, industrial technological competition, and the digital network competition in order to argue that the US shift toward competition is not only about Chinese discriminatory and unreasonable acts, policies and practices related to technology transfer and cyber intrusions, but a contest for supremacy over the next generation of military, economic and information/data dominance that could impact the relative legitimacy of political and socio-economic system of the two states.     

The Exceptional Case of the British Military Bases on Cyprus

As is widely known, Cyprus was the place used as springboard for all the US–British air operations in the region surrounding it, in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and so on. However, neither the Republic of Cyprus, nor the breakaway regime in the north of the island had anything to do with that. The logistical hub for those activities were the so-called Sovereign British Military Bases conceded to Britain in the 1960 Zurich Agreement in return for the independence Cyprus gained in the same year. Cyprus is the only place on the planet where the United Kingdom maintains as a legacy of British colonial rule sovereign military bases and a military presence secured as a result of a multilateral treaty of guarantee far surpassing those rights that the United Kingdom had managed to have recognized in the installation of military bases in Burma, Malta and Ceylon. Nevertheless, two things are very remarkable: why has the United States, despite its numerous other facilities in the Near East, preferred those bases for its activities? Why have the British clung on to their bases in Cyprus – in spite of the retreat of British forces from so many bases originally built by the United Kingdom in so many places around the world since 1960, although in comparison with other overseas garrisons still left of the British Empire, the one in Cyprus is the biggest and the most expensive to maintain? The article tries to illuminate the background of this paradox. It examines, based on primary and secondary sources from several countries, the historical evolution and regime of the UK Sovereign Military Bases on Cyprus, which constitute an exceptional case in both international relations and international law. It argues that the operation of the British bases in Cyprus has been exceeding the legal framework determined by the Treaty of Establishment and hardly complies with the British obligation to decolonize the entire territory of the island of Cyprus as well as the right of the Cypriot people to self-determination.     

IS THIS RUSSIA’S MOMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST?

Sir Jeremy Greenstock, formerly British permanent representative to the UN, who has had long experience of dealing with Russia in the context of diplomacy, considers whether the current moment of Russian dominance in Syria and the Middle East, combined with the recent general disengagement of the western powers in the region, could be considered as marking the beginning of a general period of Russian hegemony in the Middle East. The article takes into account the global geopolitical situation, the recent history of Russia and the Middle East, the consequences of western intervention in Iraq, and the motivations of the Russian government particularly in view of its recent engagement in Ukraine.     

EVOLVING TOWARD NORMALCY AMID ANOMALY: NORTH KOREA’S MIDDLE EAST POLICY SINCE THE DEMISE OF KIM IL-SUNG

North Korea's engagement in the Middle East is a six-decade long narrative. Neither the DPRK nor its Middle Eastern partners have remained still over this time; each region has undergone significant changes. In particular, the leadership of the North Korea is now in the hands of the third generation. No matter how stagnant and monolithic the country may seem at first sight, each generation has had to deal with differing commitments and adapt to changing realities. As such, each generational change of leadership in Pyongyang has arguably had repercussions on the DPRK's relationship Middle Eastern partners, which may at times have been misattributed to a fundamental change of approach. This study attempts, therefore, to probe the twists and turns in the DPRK's interactions with the Middle East since the death of Kim Il-sung, beginning with an appraisal of each leaderships’ priorities in North Korea, and how they could potentially influence Pyongyang's overall orientation toward its different partners in the region.     

The rise of BASIC in UN climate change negotiations

This paper assesses the role of the BASIC countries — Brazil, South Africa, India, and China — in UN climate change negotiations. The paper explores the formation and evolution of the group, and focuses on how the four major developing countries of China, India, Brazil, and South Africa have coordinated their positions and acted jointly to achieve an agreed outcome with other players in the recent UN Climate Change Conferences in Copenhagen and Cancun, based on an analysis of their country profiles and negotiation positions on a wide range of climate issues. The paper argues that the emergence of the BASIC Group is a reflection of the ongoing power shift from EU–US agreement to BASIC–US compromise in UN climate negotiations since the early 1990s. The rise of BASIC also has its roots in recent global market dynamics and further reflects the power transformation in the economic dimension of the international system.     

中东欧社会转型中的新民粹主义探析

处于第三次浪潮中的中东欧新民粹主义既具有传统民粹主义的特点,又具有新的时代特征。20世纪90年代,新民粹主义政党开始在中东欧国家出现,但并没有成为主流政治力量。进入21世纪,尤其是中东欧国家相继加入欧盟后,新民粹主义政党的影响力大增,在许多国家先后上台执政。虽然新民粹主义的活跃时期能持续多久是一个未知数,但可以肯定的是,作为中东欧国家转型过程中出现的一种新力量,它将在民主政治框架内发挥着一种晴雨表的作用,从而成为代议制政治宽容性的考验标准。     

Coercive Diplomacy: Israel,Transjordan and the UN—a Triangular Drama Revisited

The Arab states suffered humiliating defeats at the hands of Israel during the first Arab–Israeli war. Immediately following the war, Israel made brilliant and shrewd use of diplomacy to achieve its goals at the negotiating table, much as it had previously used armed force. Israel refused to negotiate with a united Arab negotiation team, preferring to isolate the states, picking them off one after the other. The Israeli–Transjordanian talks differed radically from the other armistice negotiations. Here, two parallel tracks were followed. At Rhodes, the two countries negotiated openly under UN auspices, while in Jerusalem and at King Abdullah's palace in Transjordan, representatives of the two countries held secret bilateral talks. Israel masterfully used the context of these talks to maximise its gains, using military operations to create ‘facts on the ground’, combined with direct coercion in the shape of blackmail, while taking full advantage of international power structures and abusing the trust that King Abdullah had placed in personal relations. The UN Acting Mediator, Ralph Bunche, was aware of the secret back channel, where the clearest cases of coercion took place. Physically and mentally exhausted by the protracted negotiations, he allowed the secret talks to progress despite his dislike of the outcome. The British government, at the time the protector of Transjordan, was unable to assist its client for fear of falling out with the USA, while the US government, in many ways the protector of Israel, maintained an equally ‘hands off’ stance because the talks concerned only an armistice, not a peace treaty. Already at this early stage in their relations, the power asymmetry between Israel and the Arab states was the main reason the parties could not arrive at a peaceful, sustainable solution. This article reinvestigates this diplomacy by using a combination of US, Israeli, British and UN archives, as well as the almost untouched Ralph Bunche diary.     

Italian Involvement in the Arab Revolt in Palestine, 1936–1939

Italian involvement in the Arab Revolt in Palestine (1936–1939) was perhaps the most explicit example of Rome's attempt to destabilize London's position in the Middle East, prior to Italy's entry to the Second World War. This article examines the mechanisms of Fascist Italy's assistance to the rebels in Palestine, focusing on the secret contacts between Italian officials and the Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husayni. It describes the financial support given by Italy as well as the attempts to smuggle arms to Palestine. The article also analyses Rome's diplomatic manoeuvres in connection with Palestine and its pro-Arab propaganda. It is argued that Italian policy in Palestine was governed by, and subordinate to, wider considerations of Italian policy such as imperial competition with Great Britain and a desire to increase Italy's influence in the Middle East. In fact, Fascist involvement in the ‘first Intifada’ teaches us more about Italian foreign policy than it does on the course of events in Palestine during the Arab rebellion.     

US security strategy in Asia and the prospects for an Asian regional security regime

The US–Japan alliance serves as the cornerstone of US security strategy in East Asia. The Bush administration remains supportive of efforts by Japan to become a more “normal” nation and is expected, during its second term, to continue to encourage Tokyo to play a more active role in regional security (while refraining from open pressure or from meddling in the debate over constitutional revision). The Pentagon's ongoing Global Force Review will likely result in some modest adjustments in the US military footprint in Japan, but with no lessening of Washington's overall commitment or ability to respond to regional crises. Meanwhile, Washington will continue to support institutionalized multilateral mechanisms (including sub-regional efforts that do not include the US) as useful means to promote regional security and coordinate counter-terrorism efforts, while relying on ad hoc coalitions (or unilateral actions if necessary) to address specific threats to its own security or to the security of its allies.     

Bahrain's Vision in the New Gulf Order

Given the perception of a US pullback from its commitments in the Middle East, a small state like Bahrain must develop a new vision of how to protect itself. This article analyzes Bahrain's strategy, focusing on three circles. The first, its internal circle, is complicated by the country's heterogeneity. Second, the Gulf circle entails cooperation among Bahrain's neighbors, though that has been historically difficult to achieve. The third circle is international, with Bahrain's seeking bilateral agreements with countries like the United States, China, Britain, and France. It is this circle on which Bahrain will continue to rely, and it is likely to bandwagon, allying with the most powerful players in the region.     

同盟关系变化对韩朝关系的影响

朝鲜半岛分裂伊始,南北双方就陷入了安全困境,不得不追求一种依存性的安全保障,即借助与大国结盟来取得军事优势。在有关朝鲜半岛几乎所有重大事件中都有美国的参与,形成美日支持韩国、中苏支持朝鲜的二元对立格局。纵观朝鲜半岛南北关系的发展,同盟的作用力,既可以有力地促进半岛的和平进程,也可以阻碍、中断半岛的和平进程,甚至让半岛继续长期处于分裂的对峙状态。     

‘Bid’ for Altalena: France's Covert Action in the 1948 War in Palestine

Based on documents recently discovered in French archives, the article sheds new light on the role of France, especially of its Foreign Minister Georges Bidault, in providing arms and ammunition to the Etzel – the pre-state underground Zionist movement in Israel. The ship Altalena, which was sunk by the newly-formed Israel Defence Forces in the midst of the 1948 War of Independence, remains a centre of historiographical and political controversy in Israel. France's role in this affair is examined in the wider context of its clandestine intelligence, military and diplomatic assistance to Israel, as well as its rivalry with Britain in the Middle East. The article argues that Bidault's decision was intended to undermine Britain's secret support during the war in Palestine for King Abdallah of Jordan's occupation of Jerusalem. Documents, including a report of a committee of inquiry of the French Ministry of Defence into the Altalena affair, are annexed.