Understanding Global Tensions

The University Archives has determined that this item is of continuing value to OSU's history.The Mershon Center received a $98,000 grant from the National Science Foundation and led a three-day workshop on the causes and consequences of global tensions caused by extremist movements and political violence in the Middle East. The workshop was held in Istanbul at Bogazici University in late June and convened scholars from around the world to study topics such as the influence of religion and ideology and tensions between global and local cultures.Ohio State University. Mershon Center for International Security StudiesEvent webpage, event summar

Judicialization in International Security

Many claim a process of judicialization of international dispute settlement procedures is taking place. In order to capture this ongoing process we introduce an analytical framework to assess the degree of judicialization of international dispute settlement procedures. We then proceed to present preliminary results of applying this framework to the procedure and practice of dispute settlement in the United Nations Security Council. In our concept, judicialization means that international dispute settlement procedures increasingly incorporate the normative principle of impartiality, i.e. the principle of a comparable treatment of comparable breaches of law. We use a graded scale ranging from purely diplomatic to predominantly judicial procedures to assess the degree of judicialization of any given dispute settlement procedure. From our institutionalist point of view, it is entirely an empirical question whether – and if so when – judicialized dispute settlement procedures lead to a corresponding practice of judicialized dispute settlement. For this reason we analyze in a second step the corresponding practice of dispute settlement. The degree of judicialization of the dispute settlement procedure within the framework of the United Nations Security Council remains low. Nonetheless, our comparison of the periods 1974-1983 and 1990-1999 suggests so far an increasing judicialization of the dispute settlement practice within the Security Council

United Nations Association

The University Archives has determined that this item is of continuing value to OSU's history.The Mershon Center was the primary sponsor of the Columbus chapter of the United Nations Association’s two-day intercollegiate forum, which asked students to debate the relevance of the United Nations system in the twenty-first century. For two days, delegates from UNA chapters at universities throughout Ohio and neighboring states discussed various aspects of the UN system, including the security council, the role of NGOs, the World Trade Organization, and health care.Ohio State University. Mershon Center for International Security StudiesEvent webpage, phot

International security

Міжнародна безпека.-

International Security

This is an interdisciplinary course which seeks to answer the questions what do we- states, international institutions, groups, and individuals-want when we seek security and what steps can we take to accomplish security goals? A recent summary of the discipline summarizes it as follows: “International security, also called global security , is the measures taken by states and international organizations, such as the United Nations. European Union, and others, to ensure mutual survival and safety. These measures include military action and diplomatic agreements such as treaties and conventions. International and national security are invariably linked. International security is national security or state security n the global arena. With the end of World War II. a new subject of academic study focusing on international security emerged. It began as an independent field of study, but was absorbed as a sub-field of international relations. Since it took hold in the 1950s, the study of international security has been at the heart of international relations studies. lt covers labels like security studies , strategic studies , peace studies , and others. The meaning of security is often treated as a common sense term that can be understood by unacknowledged consensus . The content of international security has expanded over the years. Today it covers a variety of interconnected issues in the world that affect survival. It ranges from the traditional or conventional modes of military power, the causes and consequences of war between states, economic strength, to ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts, trade and economic conflicts, energy supplies, science and technology, food, as well as threats to human security and the stability of states from environmental degradation, infectious diseases, climate change and the activities of non-state actors. While the wide perspective of international security regards everything as a security matter, the traditional approach focuses mainly or exclusively on military concerns. The concept of an international security actor has extended in all directions since the 1990s, from nations to groups, individuals, international systems, NGOs, and local governments.” Students are required to place themselves in the shoes of policy makers, consultants, and operators in order to evaluate particular actions to determine whether these actions enhance or detract from the goals of security

Peace, War and International Security: Economic Theories

This paper considers the economic theories that are relevant for the study of peace war and international security . It presents different levels of generality, starting with the big questions of international security, which are usually the domain of international relations, before moving to general economic theoretical perspectives and then focusing on some specific developments in economics and security. More specifically it reviews the economics of security, distinguishing neoclassical theories, Keynesian and institutional, Marxist, and monopoly capital, before discussing the issues involved in the debate between the schools of thought. The economics of conflict is then considered, starting with the approach economists have taken –mainly neoclassical, before considering more general political economy perspectives.Economics; Peace; war; security;

American hegemony or global governance? Competing visions of international security

An overview is given of two competing visions of contemporary international security: United States hegemony and security governance. According to these perspectives, the current generation is either witnessing the return to classical balance-of-power politics, in which the US as the sole surviving superpower can impose hegemonic or imperialist policies upon other nations, or the continuation of a new era of security governance that began after the end of the Cold War. To better understand these two visions, an attempt is made to clarify the concepts of hegemony and security governance and the hypotheses linked to these two approaches. Specifically, it is illustrated why the policies of the US since September 11 might not only be perceived as hegemonic, but also as imperialist within the context of neorealist theorizing

A Tough Little Boat: The Pogo-HMCS Labrador’s Hydrographic Survey Launch

In the summer of 1995 the Canadian War Museum accepted delivery of the Pogo, the 36-foot aluminum sounding boat which had accompanied the voyages of HMCS Labrador, Canada’s first and last Arctic Patrol vessel. One of the considerations that led to its acquisition lies in the CWM’s mission statement, to document “Canada’s commitment to peacekeeping and maintenance of international security.” We have a tendency to speak of international security as a concept symptomatic of the Nuclear Age because, prior to the Second World War, countries could afford to take an isolationist stance and dismiss the tension between belligerents as “none of their business.” However, the long-range nuclear bomber and the subsequent introduction of the intercontinental ballistic missile made tensions everybody’s business. The early 1950s were the beginning of an era where Canada began to define its postwar image and the addition of this artifact to the National Collection is a physical reminder of Canada\u27s role in the achievement of Arctic sovereignty and the development of international security

The end of the ‘new world order’? security governance and US imperialism after 9/11

The concept of global governance has emerged as a key theoretical approach since the 1990s. Applied to the transformation of international security, it has suggested a shift from the state-dominated bipolar system of the Cold War era to a new multipolar and multilateral security architecture in which state, non-state and international actors collaborate in the making and implementation of security policies. Then came September 11, 2001 and the war in Iraq. Today we appear to be more likely to discuss the nature of American hegemony and the stability of a unipolar international system. Observing the clash between these two competing perspectives of international security, the aims of this paper are threefold. First, this paper seeks to examine the respective theoretical assumptions underlying the concepts of hegemony and governance. Second, it examines the competing hypotheses proposed by these two theories with regard to international security. Third, it discusses in how far the empirical evidence since September 11, can be taken as indication of either a hegemonic strategy by the United States and balancing or bandwagoning behaviour by other major powers, or the continuation of security governance