同族群平叛优势理论再思考：以印度平息锡克叛乱为例

同族群优势主要包括当地环境、人力情报和民众动员等三个方面,各方都有机会去利用同族群优势,争取在少数族群叛乱与反叛乱斗争态势中的优势。政府平叛策略应强调发挥温和派的作用,从而在同族群因素方面削弱、抵消乃至胜过叛乱组织的相对优势。同族群平叛优势的作用机制在于控制人口和争夺民心两个方面,当政府控制足够多的当地人口时,叛乱组织就无法在族群内部招募到足够的人员,以补充在政府平叛行动中损失的成员;而拥有民众支持的意义则在于,虽然有了民众支持并不必然平息叛乱,但是没有民众支持是无法平息叛乱的,叛乱组织将一直具备持续甚至升级叛乱的民众基础。为了考察同族群平叛优势的效用,根据温和派是否具备相对于叛乱组织的实力优势和是否拥有平叛行动主导权,有四种不同策略下的平叛效果考察框架。结合印度政府治理和平息锡克叛乱各个阶段有代表性的平叛行动,详细解读印度政府、锡克叛乱组织和温和派在各阶段的策略选择,以及如何影响同族群优势的平叛效果。     

尊让与监督:美国防疫诉讼与公共卫生安全治理

法治是公共卫生安全治理中的重要组成部分。美国公共卫生安全治理中始终存在一系列权力与权利的矛盾关系。其中主要矛盾是州政府行使治安权保护公共卫生安全与个人权利之间的冲突。要有效落实防疫政策等公共卫生安全治理举措,必须在公共卫生安全利益与个人权利间实现平衡。司法权能够裁决争议、抑止损害,持续对公共卫生安全治理产生重要影响。历史上,美国法院在公共卫生案件中采取司法尊让立场,推动了公共卫生安全治理的发展。当前,法院对政府其他分支机构行使权力的司法监督增强。新冠肺炎疫情下,美国公共卫生安全法治缺乏必要的稳定性,法院难以通过司法方式有效平衡公共卫生安全利益与个人权利。这不仅削弱了美国司法体系对公共卫生安全治理的影响力,也加深了美国公共卫生安全治理的困境。     

International Rules Restructuring and Chinas Response

Currently, a new pattern of regional cooperation in the Asia Pacific is in the making in which the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement （TPP）, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement （RCEP） and China-Japan-Korea （CJK） FTA run in parallel. How to balance and handle the relationship among these regional cooperation regimes is of vital importance to Chinas participation in and promotion of regional integration process,     

‘The disenchantment conference’: Frustration and humour at the world disarmament conference, 1932

A parody of the work of the Air Commission of the World Disarmament Conference of 1932–34 reveals the cynicism and boredom, as well as the personality, of the officials in the British delegation. In doing so, it demonstrates something of the futility of trying resolve the question of disarmament when bureaucrats and military experts are given free reign.     

ADJUDICATING THE REGULATORY PENALTIES AGAINST NONPROFESSIONAL TAXI SERVICES IN CHINA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION

This paper provides an overview of judicial decisions on lawsuits against regulatory penalties imposed on nonprofessional taxi drivers and ride-hailing platform operators in China and the European Union (especially Germany). Despite strikingly different facts in these cases, courts in both China and the EU are frequently called upon to rule on similar legal issues, including the applicability of old regulatory rules to new forms of transport services, the regulatory bar for the operation of emerging transport models, and the proper intensity of competition in taxi markets. The comparison of such cases suggests that for deciding the regulatory schemes of the innovative economy of transport services, the judicial system is not better suited than the regulatory system, especially the regulatory authority of the central government. Moreover, an experimental regulatory approach with minimum standards is arguably a feasible option that can fit with the emerging nature of innovative businesses.     

Groups and Deliberation

We present a group‐based approach to the study of deliberation. Deliberation occurs in groups, yet many studies of deliberation do not take the group as a unit of analysis. We argue that group composition and the attendant social dynamics to which they give rise are an important aspect of deliberation. We offer several examples of ways to study these effects, including the interaction of gender composition and the group's decision rule in the context of an experimental study of decisions about justice, the effect of racial composition in simulated juries, and the effect of ideological composition in local meetings. We examine the consequences of these factors on a variety of outcomes, including individuals' private opinion, individuals' behaviour, and group decisions. In conclusion we discuss the implications that group effects have for empirical and normative theories of deliberation.     

The Major Powers on Trial

Faced with incontrovertible evidence of the most clear-cut caseof genocide possible, the international community failed todenounce the evil and to take action to stop the killings takingplace in Rwanda in 1994. Under the influence of three majorpowers—France, the United States and the United Kingdom—theUnited Nations was disabled from taking the necessary actionbecause the mass slaughter of the Tutsi people did not impingeon these powers' narrowly defined national interests. In thespecific case of France, there is evidence to show that thispower arguably aided and abetted the genocide. Yet, in contrast,these three powers were able to take decisive and quick actionwhen faced with an outraged domestic public in response to thehumanitarian crisis which unfolded from the genocide. Thereare many reasons why individuals and governments cannot bringthemselves to use the word ‘genocide’. In the caseof Rwanda, perhaps the enormity of the concept prevented thosewho were in the midst of it from recognizing it for what itactually was.