Defining Civil War by Examining Post-Soviet Conflicts

Great many violent events happened during 1991–2005 in the 12 states that emerged after the collapse of the USSR but only a few civil wars are registered in the major datasets. That brings up a number of questions about the operational definitions of civil war that generally point in the direction of shifting the research attention from refining the quantitative parameters to grasping the essense of the phenomena in question. It is proposed that civil war partially overlaps with several other type of violent crisis: inter-state wars, civil unrest and revolutions, internal repression, military coups and mutinies, banditry and organized crime, and terrorism. These overlaps create six ‘gray zones’ where only very nuanced examination rather than application of rigid criteria could help in distinguishing civil wars from other crises. Therefore, data collection based on a single “robust” definition, which incorporates several verifiable parameters, is not necessarily the only path to scientific knowledge about civil wars.     

Current legal approaches to international Terrorism

Abstract

Most difficulties in achieving international cooperation to suppress “terrorism” reflect failures to take account of the way authority is distributed in the international legal order. Attempts to narrow or abolish the “political offense,” exception to extradition treaties, are seen as either futile or self‐defeating for both political and legal reasons. Five other approaches are analyzed and promise is seen in three of them. The fourth, resting on the extension of national jurisdiction in disregard of the limits inherent in the international legal order, is seen as the one most attractive to the United States, Germany, and Iran, but the one most likely to lead to unmanageable political complications. The fifth, relating to an “international criminal court,” is seen as most attractive to lawyers who would like to rule the world, but is inconsistent with both law and reality. A plea is made to statesmen and lawyers to examine the other three more closely.     

The predicament of elections in war-torn societies

Why do elections held in the shadow of civil wars sometimes generate more violence in already war-torn societies, while in other circumstances they do not? This article develops a conceptual framework based on three clusters of factors to analyse the conflict-generating aspects of elections in war-torn societies: the key actors in the electoral processes; the institutions of elections; and the stakes of the elections. Two types of war-related elections are distinguished: elections held during an ongoing civil war, and elections held in the post-war period when peace is to be implemented. While different in many respects, the two contexts share critical characteristics through their association with the legacy of warfare. Several important implications emerge from the analysis. First, relating to militant and violent actors, incentive structures need to be altered by addressing both the opportunities and means of violence. Second, to prevent inducements for violent behaviour, institutional arrangements – including electoral commissions – have to be crafted with consideration given to local conflict dynamics and the history of violent conflict. Finally, the stakes of elections in war-shattered societies can be reduced through, for instance, constitutional pact-making and the oversight of external actors in electoral processes.     

Does civil war breed authoritarian values? An empirical study of Bosnia-Herzegovina,Kosovo and Croatia

This article analyses how armed conflict affects individual support for liberal values. It is commonly assumed that the consolidation of democracy depends on individual values such as tolerance as well as aspirations of civil and political liberty. For post-conflict societies, consolidating democracy is also a means of reducing the risk of recurring violent conflict. However, democracy has proven to be especially hard to achieve and consolidate in ethnically divided societies. While previous research has centred mainly on institutions and political elites, I expand the focus to also include ordinary citizens. Using survey data from post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Croatia, I examine the effect of exposure to violence on a scale of authoritarian values. While the effects are small, the results show that war-related violence in some cases leads people to embrace authoritarian values.     

简析赌博机犯罪之司法认定——以“两高一部”《意见》为视角

设置赌博机组织赌博活动构成开设赌场罪即所谓的赌博机犯罪。根据《意见》赌博机犯霏的司法认定,应该包括对利用赌博机组织赌饵行为的性质认定、定罪标准、罪与非罪的界定和共犯、赌资、赌博机的认定等方面内容的考量。     

城市少数民族流动人口犯罪实证研究--以S市M区的统计数据为基础的分析

对s市M区统计数据的实证分析表明,城市涉嫌犯罪的少数民族人员以无任何前科记录的初中文化水平以下的外来男性农民和无业人员为主;实施的犯罪行为比较轻,相对集中于盗窃罪,寻衅滋事罪,走私、贩卖、运输、制造毒品罪等几个罪名;共同犯罪的规模较小,共同犯罪人之间的联系比较松散,作案手段多元化、相对平和,重特大案件罕见;适用刑罚比较轻缓,以3年以下有期徒刑、拘役、罚金为主。城市少数民族人员犯罪并不是严重的社会现象,其数量和严重程度远远低于汉族人犯罪。因此,少数民族“流动人口”犯罪问题不应当特殊化,应当在人口流动和城镇化的背景下,理性客观地对待少数民族人员犯罪问题,贯彻宽严相济的刑事政策,采取措施使得少数民族“流动人口”尽快融入大城市。     

网络犯罪管辖权问题研究

在现行刑事案件管辖制度的基础上,网络犯罪管辖权应进一步细化联结点并确立优先次序.不同类型的网络犯罪在管辖权设定上的关注点应有所不同.网络犯罪案件的管辖应当遵循实体法与程序法相一致、案件的全面覆盖与均衡分布、便利性等价值追求.以实施网络犯罪行为的计算机终端所在地为行为地,以受害人发现权利被侵害的计算机终端所在地为犯罪结果发生地,并辅之以被告人住所地,确立一个分层次的网络犯罪司法管辖体系.     

论惩治恐怖活动犯罪的国际刑事司法合作

有效防治恐怖活动犯罪离不开国际刑事司法合作。出于打击恐怖活动犯罪的目的,国际社会对于恐怖活动犯罪排除适用政治犯不引渡原则。打击恐怖活动犯罪还需在联合侦查、情报交流与信息合作、案件文书送达等方面开展司法协助。在国际刑事司法协助中有必要建立刑事诉讼移转管辖的司法合作制度,以便于各国之间加强反恐合作,更加有效地打击恐怖活动犯罪。     

Preventive War and Permissive Normative Order

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, U.S. president George W. Bush articulated a new national security strategy based on striking terrorist organizations and the states that harbor them before they could endanger the United States. Though expressed in the language of preemption, the Bush strategy embodied a far more problematic doctrine of preventive warfare. Whereas the grounds for preemption lie in evidence of a credible, imminent threat, the basis for prevention rests on the suspicion of an incipient, contingent threat. We argue that an American national security strategy that embraces preventive war will set an inauspicious precedent, undermining normative restraints on when and how states may use military force.     

Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Beyond the Inclusion–Exclusion Dichotomy

Civil society is generally seen as an important actor in peace processes. But when it comes to reaching an agreement during peace negotiations, much of the current debate is centered on the question of including or excluding civil society. Although most researchers argue that civil society participation makes the process more sustainable and democratic, most practitioners emphasize that enhanced civil society participation makes it more difficult to reach a peace agreement. I argue that practitioners and theorists must both move beyond this dichotomy and, instead, focus on the variety of ways in which civil society actors can be included in a given negotiation process. To this end, I present in this article a comprehensive overview of nine models of inclusion, from most to least direct involvement of civil society, supported by illustrative case studies. Analysis of these models suggests that it will be possible to broaden the participation of civil society in peace negotiations without decreasing the negotiations' effectiveness.