Editorial introduction: international marriage,rights and the state in East and Southeast Asia

The dramatic increase in intra-Asia cross-nationality marriage is a distinct, yet relatively under-researched, aspect of globalization and regionalization. Most existing research focuses on individual experiences of international marriage, but articles in this issue are intended to examine the politics of legal recognition: namely, how states categorize, legitimate and de-legitimate various intimacies, and how gender, religion, nationality and class play their roles in this process. More specifically, the articles address the following four themes: (1) the links between the institutionalization of marriage and ideologies of family in the process of nation-building; (2) the coexistence and conflicts between different legal systems vis-à-vis marriage and the related social implications; (3) gender and its implications for access to citizenship; and (4) recent policy changes in nationality laws and the reconstruction of ‘national identities’ in the transnational context. Thus, collectively this volume deepens our understanding of citizenship issues in East and Southeast Asia by teasing out how, in the case of foreign spouses, membership of a nation is determined legally, politically, culturally and socially.     

Outside and inside competition for international organizations—from analysis to innovations

The analysis of the competitive environment of international organizations has been neglected in scholarly research. Both the external and the internal type of competition in international organizations are rather weak and their performance is far from ideal. To strengthen both types of competition, several tentative proposals are advanced. They range from the introduction of an international competition agency, competition rules, a monitoring institute, voucher systems, matching contributions, popular participation rights by citizens to the use of prediction markets and institutionalized devil’s advocates. These proposals are put forward to stimulate discussion and to advance new ideas about the design of international organizations.

Trust in international organizations: An empirical investigation focusing on the United Nations

The literature on social capital has strongly increased in the last two decades, but there still is a lack of substantial empirical evidence about the determinants of international trust. This empirical study analyzes a cross-section of individuals, using micro-data from the World Values Survey, covering 38 countries, to investigate trust in international organizations, specifically in the United Nations. In line with previous studies on international trust we find that political trust matters. We also find that social trust is relevant, but contrary to previous studies the results are less robust. Moreover, the paper goes beyond previous studies investigating also the impact of geographic identification, corruption and globalization. We find that a higher level of (perceived) corruption reduces the trust in the UN in developed countries, but increases trust in developing and transition countries. A stronger identification with the world as a whole also leads to a higher trust in the UN and a stronger capacity to act globally in economic and political environment increases trust in the UN.

Empirical legitimation analysis in International Relations: how to learn from the insights – and avoid the mistakes – of research in EU studies

ABSTRACT

The political legitimation (or de-legitimation) of the European Union (EU) has been the object of much empirical research. This paper argues that this research holds lessons that can inform debates about the legitimation of global governance more generally. After some conceptual clarifications, the paper presents a critical review of the literature on the EU’s legitimation, focusing on six crucial aspects – (1) the emergence and change of legitimation debates; (2) the arenas where legitimation occurs; (3) the role of the state as a reference point in legitimacy assessments; (4) the difference between various objects of legitimation; (5) the actors that trigger legitimation change; as well as (6) the relationship between legitimation and polity development. In each of these respects, the paper identifies important insights that can be gained from EU Studies, but also conceptual and methodological weaknesses in the EU-related literature that researchers working on other aspects of global governance should avoid. The paper closes by formulating a set of general desiderata for empirical legitimation research in International Relations.     

Pan-European thought in British fascism: the International Third Position and the Alliance for Peace and Freedom

Shaffer’s article explores pan-Europeanism in post-war British fascism by examining the International Third Position (ITP) and the Alliance for Peace and Freedom (APF). More marginal than the National Front and the British National Party, these groups never sought electoral influence or attracted a noteworthy membership. However, the ITP and the APF served as an important expression of extremist thought after the National Front and British National Party suffered from declining support. Both notably involved Nick Griffin and Roberto Fiore—who played significant roles in post-war fascism—although their involvement has not been explored in detail. By examining their activities, Shaffer argues that the pan-Europeanism of the ITP and the APF represented an evolution of British fascism that focused on foreign audiences and non-electoral goals. Despite containing elements of pan-Europeanist thought that existed in the NF and the BNP, they sought a purer and more exclusive objective with a strictly international focus.     

Yea,Nay, and Everything in Between: Disparities within the Academic Ombuds Field

Few colleges and universities have chosen to establish ombuds offices, and the profession itself has remained relatively obscure. Although organizations have established different types of ombuds offices, the International Ombudsman Association (IOA) defines an organizational ombuds office as a neutral, informal, independent, and confidential office that allays and prevents conflict within the organization and brings systemic concerns to the attention of the organization for resolution. Ombuds office professionals work with individuals to inform them of their options and help them express their concerns in challenging conflict situations. But they also work at the systemic level to alert leaders to important institutional trends and patterns that they would be less likely to perceive on their own. In this article, I examine several stark discrepancies within the academic ombuds profession that may contribute to the relative invisibility of the field itself. While organizational ombudspeople who belong to the IOA unite under the IOA's standards of practice in theory, in practice they diverge in several areas, including the nature of their positions, hiring practices, the level of informality in their practice, their degree of isolation or integration within their institutions, how they cultivate relationships on campus, and how essential they consider ombuds offices to be for the effective functioning of the university. They often also fundamentally disagree about such areas as:

• ? the terminology that defines the job — practitioners disagree about the usefulness of the terms “ombuds” and “ombudspeople,” for example;
• ? the role of neutrality and the challenge of maintaining it;
• ? the value of IOA certification;
• ? the most appropriate methods for evaluating the effectiveness of an ombuds office; and
• ? how ombuds make recommendations for institutional improvement.

The ombuds profession in general — and academic ombuds professionals in particular — need not necessarily resolve all practice discrepancies in order to thrive, but I argue that open acknowledgement of existing discrepancies can help the profession more effectively promote itself and present a more consistent image to the world.     

International Recognition and Religion: A Quantitative Analysis of Kosovo’s Contested Status

Recognition from other recognized states is the key to becoming a fully fledged member state of the international system. Although many new states are quickly and universally recognized, the recognition of other aspiring states remains highly contested. In these cases of contested sovereignty, some countries but not others extend recognition. However, research on what shapes a country’s decision to recognize a claim to sovereign statehood remains relatively sparse. This article focuses on how religion shapes the incentives of states to extend or withhold recognition to aspiring states in cases of contested sovereignty. It posits two mechanisms, one at the domestic level through religious institutions and one at the international level through transnational religious affinities. The article uses new data on all state decisions regarding the international recognition of Kosovo to test these propositions. The results provide strong support for these two pathways through which religion shapes state decisions regarding international recognition.     

Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.     

An auto-critique of TWAIL’s historical fallacy: sketching an alternative manifesto

Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) has been impactful in international law scholarship. However, many of its epistemic approaches, especially its active historicising, have often turned counterproductive to its objective of securing freedom for the peoples of the Third World. Moreover, pursuing the colonial past through weighty polemics has rendered TWAIL a discourse that engenders anti-Western sentiments. Further, TWAIL’s dialectic means of resistance and opposition to a past-influenced present ingrained in international law and systems, which are at the disposal of the West, have the reverse effect of dialectically imposing a Western otherness on TWAIL. Hence, an alternative manifesto is sketched, which, while it disagrees with the exclusion of the West in social production, refuses to privilege the West through a Hegelian dialectic of otherness. The alternative manifesto proposes an alternative dialectic wherein the otherness is a ‘universal’ in the self-consciousness of the subjects. It is a dialectic of inclusion and open participation. The article also attempts to situate the new dialectic in international law.     

论民族、种族和宗教犯罪的立法完善——从国际人权公约角度看

民族、种族和宗教相互之间具有紧密联系,且对一个国家的和谐与稳定关系重大。我国加入或即将加入的国际人权公约对民族、种族和宗教相关的犯罪行为已经作出了明确规定,我国有必要以国际人权公约的规定为参照检视我国刑法在民族、种族和宗教犯罪上的规定,作出与我国实际相符合、也与国际人权公约相一致的修正。修改现有相关犯罪的构成条件,增加我国刑法没有规定但危害严重的民族、种族和宗教犯罪。