Small arm transfers and state complicity in international law： Challenging the limitations

Small arms have been frequently used in perpetration of human rights violations, and thus need to be subjected to legal scrutiny. This piece attempts to contribute this aim by making a legal analysis of the issue of state complicity in arm transfers. Drawing a frame of applicable laws, it highlights the importance of Article 16 of the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility where the notion of complicity in international law is typically designed. Moreover, this piece finds the scope of protection provided within this Article limited, and contends that the boundaries of liability for complicit acts must take into account the contemporary political, social, and economic settings for a wider understanding of complicity.     

School Choice: Money,Race, and Congressional Voting on Vouchers

Milton Friedman has suggested that the political power of the AmericanFederation of Teachers and the National Education Association (the twomajor teachers unions) has been instrumental in defeating the adoption ofeducational vouchers. We test this hypothesis.We find that a campaign contribution to a memberof the U.S. House of Representatives by either unionreduces the probability that also a Representative will vote for apro school choice amendment to the ``No Child Left Behind Act of2001.'' Also a Representative whose districthas a large African American population or who is Republicanis more likely to vote for vouchers.     

Accounting for Extra-Dyadic Sources of International Outcomes

Leaders consider the broader international landscape when making foreign policy choices. This landscape could encompass a single external actor, the local region, or even the whole international system. Quantitative analyses of international outcomes, however, frequently do not account for this broader context. This study suggests a corrective, illustrating the value of incorporating extra-dyadic variables into analyses with dyadic and monadic outcomes. The challenge is to parsimoniously capture theoretically salient elements of the multilateral environment. We contend that a measure that links distributions of power within any k-set of relevant states to uncertainty over conflict outcomes is a promising option for two reasons. First, the measure builds from and accords with canonical theories of international politics. Second, it offers scholars a simple and flexible means to define and account for the set of states that constitute the relevant multilateral landscape. Illustrative applications linking power distributions and outcome uncertainty to alliance formation and pursuit of nuclear weapons demonstrate that extra-dyadic factors consistently influence foreign policy outcomes. This study thus shows that situating such outcomes within their broader context is both feasible and substantively important. Moreover, it contributes to recent efforts to address shortcomings of monadic and dyadic studies.     

Explaining the birthright citizenship lottery: Longitudinal and cross‐national evidence for key determinants

In the modern nation‐state, birthright citizenship laws – jus soli and jus sanguinis – are the two main gateways to sociopolitical membership. The vast majority of the world's population (97 percent) obtains their citizenship as a matter of birthright. Yet because comparative research has focused on measuring and explaining the multiple components of citizenship and immigration policies, a systematic analysis of birthright citizenship is lacking. We bridge this gap by analyzing the birthright component in prominent databases on citizenship policies and complementing them with original data and measures. This allows us to systematically test institutional and electoral explanations for contemporary and over‐time variation in birthright citizenship. Institutional explanations – legal codes and colonial history – are consistently associated with limitations on birthright law. As for electoral explanations, specific electoral powers – Nationalist, Socialist and Social‐Democratic parties – rather than the traditional left/right‐wing divide, are linked with reforms in birthright regimes.     

The Social Organisation of Migrant Smugglers in Turkey: Roles and Functions

Thousands of irregular migrants and refugees are transported from conflict areas and/or underdeveloped countries to wealthy Western states. These transfers are usually facilitated and arranged by migrant smuggling organisations. This paper reflects part of a comprehensive research project on irregular migration and migrant smuggling in Turkey and examines the structure and networks of smugglers operating in Turkey. Based on face-to-face interviews with smugglers (N?=?54), it aims to shed light on migrant smugglers, smuggling structures and their organisations in Turkey. The findings suggest that the migrant smuggling business is composed of networks established at the local, national and international levels. These are structured on an ad hoc basis and are often adaptable to any changes and opportunities that may arise.     

The attack on national regulation: why we need a global framework for domestic regulation

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. Key points

• In regulating cross-border capital markets transactions,regulators are employing either an exemptive approach, or aunilateral or mutual recognition approach. The exemptive approachallows market participants wherever located to transact businessin the host countries without complying with local requirements.The recognition approach is limited to a particular market,but is more expansive in terms of access to host country investors.In regulating cross-border transactions, the SEC has traditionallyrelied on the exemptive approach, and has restricted participationto only the largest, most sophisticated US investors. Recently,it has moved to a mutual recognition approach with its agreementwith Australia, which allows a broader range of US investorsto conduct cross-border transactions with Australian exchangesand broker–dealers relying almost entirely on the adequacyof the Australian regulatory system. However, both its exemptiveapproach and mutual recognition approach deal only with secondarymarket transactions, not participation in offerings.
• While. . . [Full Text of this Article]