Russia and NATO expansion: The uneasy basis of the founding act

Much of the debate since the formation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy has focused on the political will, or lack thereof, as the principal obstacle to a successful European security policy. However, even if a cohesive will to develop a clear and operational foreign and security policy exists, the lack of military capabilities within the EU would make the implementation of that policy difficult, if not impossible, for the foreseeable future. The emerging political will to develop a CFSP needs to be paralleled by significant improvements in the force projection capabilities of the EU member states in order for a CFSP and future Common Defence Policy to be credible.     

Negotiating access to populations of concern in South-East Asia

South-East Asia is home to both conflict and ‘natural’ disasters which have caused significant displaced populations. Given this context, there is a need to better understand the motivations of the multiple actors involved in negotiating humanitarian responses, and to account for the impact the finished agreement has on the region both in the short and long terms. This article investigates the motivations behind two humanitarian responses in South-East Asia. The first case is the set of humanitarian responses to the Indochinese exodus in the 1970s and 1980s. The second case is the humanitarian response to those affected by Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar during the late 2000s and early 2010. Both of these agreements have been held up as historic and ground breaking achievements within the international relations of South-East Asia. This article assesses these agreements to identify the multiple levels of governance involved and the individual actors’ motivations behind them. It argues that greater appreciation of these dynamics will contribute to understanding the governance of humanitarian responses to populations of concern in South-East Asia. This will be important to consider as new crises emerge that demand new negotiations within a crowded field of actors governing humanitarian responses in the region.     

The Non-Compliance Mechanism Under the Aarhus Convention as ‘Soft’ Enforcement of International Environmental Law: Not So Soft After All!

Netherlands International Law Review - This article engages in the exercise of measuring the ‘degree of judiciality’ of the Non-Compliance Mechanism under the Aarhus Convention by...     

Chaos in the Field: Soviet Karelia's Food Supply Detachments, 1918–1920

This article traces the creation, experiences and success of Karelia's food supply detachments during the Russian Civil War and focuses on three target provinces: Kursk, Simbirsk and Saratov. It emphasises the early political and economic stumbling blocks faced by the Bolsheviks in their attempts to implement the party's food supply policies in the periphery and indicates that, although the Soviet food supply system by mid-1919 was more centralised and resistance from local soviets lessened, improvements were only relative to the more chaotic conditions of the previous year.     

‘Old’ un peacekeeping principles and ‘new’ conflicts: Some ideas to reduce the troubles of post‐cold war peace missions

The European Union (EU) has declared its European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) operational. It has put the institutional structures in place to manage the political aspects of security and defence policy and the member-states have pledged a range of military capabilities, which the EU may call upon. However there are significant issues that need to be resolved for the ESDP to be a truly effective and credible policy. On the whole, these issues revolve around military capabilities, defence spending and a strategic concept. Without investing in critical military capabilities and without a clear direction, ESDP will become a policy without substance.     

CAUSATION IN EC MERGER CONTROL

"there are ever so many ways that a world might be; and oneof these many ways is the way that this world is" (David Lewis,1986)

This article looks at two areas of merger control under EC Lawwhere the principles of causation are applied and, in our view,misapplied. The article traces the development of the conceptof the "counterfactual" in antitrust law. It then draws on thisanalysis in considering the operation of the "failing firm defense,"and in particular the standard of proof employed by the Commissionwhen analyzing the "counterfactual" in relation to the failingfirm defense. We argue that the Commission employs an excessivelyhigh standard of proof, and that this standard of proof contributesto the drawing of the failing firm defense too narrowly, througha misapplication of the principles of causation. We then proceedto contrast and prefer the approach of the UK Competition Commissionin recent cases. In the final part of the article we considerscenarios where two or more mergers are contemplated in thesame market at the same time, in cases of both parallel andoverlapping mergers. In these complicated scenarios, which requireprospective, multifaceted analysis, we set out in detail how,despite inherent difficulties, a similarly rigorous applicationof the principles of causation produces coherent results.