The Syrian chemical weapons disarmament process in context: narratives of coercion,consent, and everything in between

This article explores the successful Syrian chemical weapons disarmament process (2013–2014) within the context of post-Cold War coercive arms control policy and scholarship, particularly related to the Middle East. Based on extensive interviews with individuals involved in the process, we explore the coexistence of two rival, apparently contradictory narratives: one (backed by Western states) claimed coercion was the main contributor to disarmament, while the other (defended by Syrian authorities and Russia) insisted on the process’s consensual features. Our study suggests that the hybrid disarmament framework, embodied in a unique joint mission between the United Nations and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, conveniently accommodated both narratives, which in turn contributed to the mission’s success. We then ask whether, with the apparent US retreat in the Middle East, the Syrian case (as well as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal) signals a possible turn in international non-conventional arms control processes that would leave more room for consent and diplomacy.     

‘We have chased Blaise,so nobody can resist us’: Civil society and the politics of ECOWAS intervention in Burkina Faso

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the limits of ECOWAS’ top-down approach to mediation, based on a case study from Burkina Faso in 2014 and 2015. It shows the growing importance of ordinary citizens in the regulation of political arenas, both at the domestic and the regional level, as well as citizens’ impact on ECOWAS mediation in Burkina Faso. It thereby argues that mediation in ‘revolutionary’ situations is hardly feasible. In Burkina Faso, the 2014 popular uprising created a new kind of citizenry who felt ‘sovereign’ and expressed its grievances through mass mobilisations. In such political contexts, regional mediation, which aims at re-establishing stability and power-sharing agreements, becomes problematic because it contradicts the spirit ‘from the streets’. Moreover, the top-down approach also erodes the legitimacy of the mediators, who are perceived to work against ‘the people’s will’. The reflection draws attention to the tensions between international mediators and actors from below and highlights the need to craft new strategies for conducting mediation in the context of popular uprisings.     

The Evolution of Saudi Foreign Policy and the Role of Decision-making Processes and Actors

Abstract

Saudi Arabia has witnessed a centralisation of power in the office of the deputy crown prince, which has amounted to a shift in decision-making from consensual and deliberative to swift and adventurous, most markedly in foreign policy. This centralisation is coupled with an increase in institutionalisation. A new decision-making pattern and rising Iranian power in the region have affected the evolution of Saudi foreign policy. The Saudi crown prince’s strict handling of Shia dissidents acknowledges the perceived extension of the Iranian threat to internal security. The relationship between these two princes and Saudi political competition with Iran will affect the evolution of Saudi foreign policy in a critical manner in the future.     

Role conflict and the limits of state identity: the case of Indonesia in democracy promotion

This paper aims to analyse why Indonesia projects democracy as a state identity by taking on the role of democracy promoter? This paper argues that Indonesia's aspiring role as a democracy promoter is not a manifestation of a firm and coherent democratic political culture, which is more likely to be a permanent feature of states. Thus, rather than seeing it as firmly established state identity, instead, Indonesia's democratic identity should be seen as role conception articulated by foreign policy elites in its quest for international prestige. Its role as a democracy promoter has enabled Indonesia to enhance its other roles conceptions such as a regional leader in Southeast Asia as well as a bridge-builder at the global level. However, this paper further argues that Indonesia's role as a democracy promoter has also been hindered due to the inter-role conflicts arising from its enactment of multiple roles. As a result, Indonesia's enactment of the role as democracy promoter has relatively less impactful towards democratization in the region. To substantiate this argument, the paper examines Indonesia's strategies in promoting democracy and human rights in three case studies, namely Indonesia's role in mainstreaming human rights in ASEAN, Indonesia's democracy promotion through the Bali Democracy Forum, and Indonesia's engagement towards democratization in Myanmar.     

GC‐MS and IR Studies on the Six Ring Regioisomeric Dimethoxyphenylpiperazines (DOMePPs)

A number of N‐substituted piperazines have been described as drugs of abuse in recent years. This new drug category includes several series of aromatic ring substituted phenylpiperazines. The wide variety of available precursors makes regioisomerism a significant issue in these totally synthetic compounds. In this study, a complete series of regioisomeric dimethoxyphenylpiperazines were synthesized and evaluated using GC‐MS and FT‐IR. The EI mass spectra show fragments characteristic of both the dimethoxyphenyl and the piperazine portions of the molecules including the dimethoxyphenylaziridinium cation (m/z 180) and dimethoxyphenyl cation (m/z 137). The ion at m/z 56 for the C₃H₆N⁺ fragment is characteristic of the piperazine ring and was observed in all the spectra. The perfluoroacyl derivatives were resolved by GC, and their mass spectra showed some differences in relative abundance of ions. FTIR provides direct confirmatory data for differentiation between the regioisomeric dimethoxyphenylpiperazines, and GC separation was accomplished on an Rtx‐200 phase.     

Doing,Allowing, and the State

The doing/allowing distinction plays an important role in our thinking about a number of legal issues, such as the need for criminal process protections, prohibitions on torture, the permissibility of the death penalty and so on. These are areas where, at least initially, there seem to be distinctions between harms that the state inflicts and harms that it merely allows. In this paper I will argue for the importance of the doing/allowing distinction as applied to state action. Sunstein, Holmes, Vermeule and others have presented influential arguments for the claim that where the state is concerned the doing/allowing distinction has no moral significance, even if it does elsewhere. I show that these arguments can be resisted. In doing so, I defend some important distinctions and principles that help us understand the state’s role in protecting people from harm.