On War,Peace and Armed Conflicts

In general, the relationship between rule and conduct is dominated by the concept of linear causality: the legal rule causes effect in social practice. The case study on Article 96 of the Dutch Constitution (democratic procedures for the war declaration) and Article 102 of the Dutch Penal Code (the offence: aiding the enemy in war time) makes clear that this concept is too simplistic for the complex processes that took place. The clear dividing point between war and peace — i.e., the war declaration that initiates the legal state of war — no longer exists, since a third category —'armed conflicts' — that was 'constituted' in social practice and is positioned 'somewhere' between peace and war. Exact demarcation for this category is problematic. This phenomenon has far-reaching consequences for the meaning of the Articles, mentioned above.     

Seeing War as Criminal: Peace Activist Views and Critical Criminology

A hallmark of critical criminology is its critique of the traditional definition of crime. For decades, critical scholars have proposed humanistic definitions of crime that bring state violence into the purview of academic criminology—although outside of critical criminology this is a matter of great contentiousness. This study investigates the views of those involved in peace activism, but not in any way associated with academic criminology, about the application of the term ‘crime’ to war, specifically the recent US war on Iraq. Given that there is no existing research on this subject, the article also examines how peace activists define crime generally and whether they believe those responsible for the war should be regarded as war criminals. Not surprisingly, semi‐structured interviews with 13 anti‐war activists reveal significant support for elements of critical criminological definitions of crime but an unexpected concern on the part of some that the application of the term ‘crime’ to war could be counterproductive in efforts to stop state violence. The rationales for this concern, as well as those for other issues addressed in the study, are largely presented in the interviewees’ own words.     

Neither War Nor Peace,But Disband the CCU!

Politicians may amuse themselves however they please, but do not touch the Fundamental Law. After all, it is not as hard to rectify what is wrong as it is to avoid excessive noise when doing it. Agreeing that the constitution was changed in 2004 with procedural violations, the people's deputies are now furiously discussing ways to go back to the past. The "regionals" [Party of Regions members] are advising us not to make a tragedy of this. The opposition is calling on the guarantor and the Constitutional Court to reject the automatic restoration of the 1996 Constitution.     

The International Conference on the Cessation of War and the Establishment of Peace in the Chechen Republic

On March 11, 1971, a scientist from Leningrad, Leonid Samsonovich Saliamon, defended his doctoral dissertation at the Institute of Experimental and Clinical Oncology in Moscow.     

从“民主和平论”看民主与和平的关系

“民主和平论”认为 :民主国家间没有或很少发生战争 ,“非民主国家”是战争的根源 ,扩大民主是维护和平的必然要求。“民主和平论”并不符合历史事实 ,它是推行人权外交的新干涉主义的理论基础。民主与和平之间的关系是复杂的 :国际社会的和平不仅需要一国内部的民主 ,更需要国际生活中的民主 ;民主只是影响国际和平众多原因中的一个 ,它对和平的影响是有限的 ;“民主和平论”主张建立的和平本质上是建立在不合理的国际政治、经济旧秩序基础之上的西方国家之间的局部和平 ,世界总体和平的巩固和公正、合理的国际新秩序的建立呼唤新的民主