South–South cooperation and the international development battlefield: between the oecd and the UN

This article discusses the transformation in development architecture, focusing on the role of emerging powers and the growing relevance of South–South cooperation (ssc). Drawing on a conceptual toolkit based on the work of Pierre Bourdieu, it aims to approach ssc as a narrative and to understand the processes of contestation that have turned international development into a battlefield since the end of the 1990s. The article argues that the emergence of ssc has contributed to decentring the field of international development, both in terms of the agents authorised to play and the practices considered legitimate. Within this process the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation, led by the oecd’s Development Assistance Committee, and the United Nations Development Cooperation Forum have become two sites on the battlefield on which the borders of international development are being redrawn.     

Financing the UN development system and the future of multilateralism

This article seeks to accomplish four tasks. It explores the historical relationship between the financing instruments that dominated different phases of the evolution of the UN development system and the understanding of the concept of multilateralism. Bearing in mind this historical context, it seeks to analyse the defining characteristics of multilateral finance in the context of the UN, in particular the characteristics that make a financial instrument more or less multilateral. It then explores a number of new financial instruments and their possible impact on the future shape multilateralism takes in the UN system. The article concludes with some thoughts on financing for a new multilateralism. In order to go beyond the core/non-core stalemate, it is necessary to develop a new variable geometry based on function, which brings into play assessed, negotiated pledges, voluntary core and non-core instruments.     

Emerging powers at the UN: ducking for cover?

The economic rise of China, India, South Africa, and Brazil has turned these countries into important providers of development assistance. While they seem increasingly comfortable in their bilateral relations with other developing countries, they are struggling to adapt their position within global institutions such as the United Nations. Do they turn their increased weight into a greater influence at the UN, and if not, why not? This article analyses financial contributions and political positioning at the UN in the area of development. Despite small changes, the four countries mostly insist on keeping their traditional status as recipients and ‘ordinary’ developing countries. This reservation can be explained in two ways: first, a more explicit leadership creates political and material costs that outweigh the potential benefits. Second, their shared experiences as developing countries make it hard to break ranks at the UN.     

US democracy assistance programs in Ukraine after the Orange Revolution

The 2004 Orange Revolution failed to skyrocket Ukraine into the ranks of consolidated democracies. Some previous research claimed that, in the similar case of post-Rose Revolution Georgia, its vague democratic perspectives can be explained by, among others, a negative impact of politically biased US democracy assistance programs. This article examines five groups of US programs (electoral aid, political party development, legislative strengthening, NGO development and media strengthening) implemented in Ukraine in 2005–2010, and concludes that US diplomatic support for the pro-Western “Orange” leadership did not translate into political bias of US-funded democracy assistance programs.     

Global South solidarity? China,regional organisations and intervention in the Libyan and Syrian civil wars

Why was China responsive to regional organisations’ call for intervention in the case of the Libya crisis, where it supported sanctions and an International Criminal Court referral, and acquiesced to a no-fly zone, but unresponsive to pressure from regional organisations for intervention in the Syria crisis, issuing repeated vetoes instead? Using interviews and other primary data, this article explains the variation by highlighting that China is most responsive to regional organisations when these groups remain cohesive, congregate around the same policy position and when they publicly criticise or isolate China.     

导弹防御与美国延伸威慑政策

对盟友提供的延伸威慑安全保证,是美国维持与盟友关系的重要基础。冷战时期,美国的延伸威慑主要通过核保护伞方式运作。为了应对冷战后新的安全环境,以满足新旧盟友的安全需求,美国开始通过导弹防御合作来提供对盟友的安全承诺与安全保证。这使得美国的延伸威慑从以核保护伞为核心,转变为核保护伞与导弹防御并重的模式。与盟友发展导弹防御合作关系,对美国的延伸威慑体系造成了一定程度的影响。其正面效益是,导弹防御合作使更多盟友能参与集体防务并贡献更多力量,还可增强盟友与伙伴的凝聚力和向心力,巩固美国的军事领导地位。但是,导弹防御系统仍然不具备绝对的可靠性和有效性,而且美国必须在以导弹防御合作促进延伸威慑方面投入更多的成本。如今,美国已开始加大力度,团结盟友进行新一轮的全球战略竞争。在此背景下,导弹防御延伸威慑模式的可持续性也将面临考验。     

努力提高党外代表人士教育培训工作的科学化水平

党外代表人士教育培训工作是党的干部教育培训工作的重要组成部分,也是党和国家干部教育培训体系的重要组成部分.新形势下提高党外代表人士教育培训工作的科学化水平,必须在党委的统一领导下建立党委统战部牵头协调、相关部门各负其责的教育培训工作体制机制;充实和完善教育培训的内容,进一步增强教育培训的针对性;树立现代教育理念,改进和完善教育培训的方式方法;深化改革,加强党外代表人士教育培训的体系建设.     

The Changing Facets of Public Administration in the United Arab Emirates

ABSTRACT

This article is an in-depth profile of the public administration system in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It specifically focuses on the relationship between the state, the market and civil society, the structure of the government and the civil service system and its functional areas. Reform initiatives undertaken in all these areas over the last decade have also been discussed. The findings reveal that the public administration system in the UAE has demonstrated considerable developments in facilitating the market forces, opening space for civil society and modernizing the civil service system.     

Evaluating US soft power in Asia: military,economic and sociopolitical relationships between Asia and the United States

The changing dynamics of international politics such as the expansion of the European Union, the growing importance of Asia, and the post-11 September environment have raised great concern about US soft power all over the world. At the governmental level, transpacific relationships may have encouraged military, economic and sociopolitical collaboration. The Asians' perceptions about US soft power at the individual level, however, may not be consistent with the governmental level. By using the 2003 AsiaBarometer survey, this article examines the factors that contribute to individuals' perceptions about US soft power in seven Asian nations – China, India, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Thailand. Three main factors – military, economic and sociopolitical – are considered. Higher assistance by the US government engenders positive responses from the respondents. For causal relationships, economic and sociopolitical variables, rather than the military variable, enforce individuals' positive perceptions about US soft power, according to the multilevel estimates.     

Authoritarian populism and response to COVID-19: A comparative study of the United States,India, and Brazil

As the phenomenon of populism is in the preliminary stages of exploratory research, the present study involves an empirical investigation involving a case study of the United States, India, and Brazil to examine whether a correlation exists between populism and management of COVID-19. The study adopts the ideational approach of populism as a set of ideas or discourse to review how core conceptual features of populism have impacted on management of COVID-19. The study has two main objectives: (1) to examine whether populism in the United States, India, and Brazil has determined “a populist response” to the pandemic in dealing with the health crises and (2) to explore the management of COVID-19 in the states led by right-wing populism and the commonality of populist approaches adopted in handling the health crisis. Comparing the three states' statistical data of management models, the study has argued that common populist mechanisms such as distrust for experts, contempt for institutions, and suspicion of “others” have guided the US, India, and Brazilian leadership response to COVID-19. It further argues that leadership in the United States, India, and Brazil has prevented effective management by politicizing the crisis, aggravating social polarization, and contradicting expert advice. Moreover, populist and nationalist orientation of the leadership has evaded responsibility in these states with the leadership blaming ethnicities for spreading the virus and by weakening societal solidarity.