Contents:
Assume, for a moment, that the necessary tools are available to induce or even force states to comply with international law.
In such a state of affairs, how strongly should international law be protected? More specifically, how easy should it be to change international law? In the event of states violating their commitments, what kind of back-up enforcement or sanctions should be imposed? Rather than undermining international law, variable protection takes the normativity of international law seriously and calibrates it to achieve maximum welfare and effectiveness at the lowest cost to contractual freedom and legitimacy.
The Lexicon on Post-Conflict Peacebuilding comes at a critical time for post-conflict peacebuilding. Its rapid move towards the top of the international political agenda has been accompanied by added scrutiny, as the international community seeks to meet the multi-dimensional challenges of building a just and sustainable peace in societies ravaged by war. Beyond the strictly operational dimension, there is considerable ambiguity in the concepts and terminology used to discuss post-conflict peacebuilding.
Accordingly, this Lexicon aims to clarify and illuminate the multiple facets of post-conflict peacebuilding, by presenting its major themes and trends from an analytical perspective. These steps would let G20 leaders get out in front of the crisis and reduce the chance that an avalanche of murky protectionism could hinder the global recovery.
Geneva, 25 March —- Six Professors of Development Studies came together on 25 March to share their analysis of the impact of the current crisis on the developing world from different disciplinary and thematic viewpoints. Participants in the event highlighted a number of research questions that remain unanswered and yet are crucial to guide policy responses. Gilles Carbonnier noted that the very mechanisms that stimulated economic growth in many developing and emerging countries over the past few years have become the main conduits through which the crisis has spread: Falling commodity prices resulting in lower export revenues will have serious consequences for exporting countries.
In Africa, per capita income growth is expected to come to a halt. Remittances, so important to many developing economies, may decrease for the first time in decades. Official development assistance, which plays a crucial role in these countries, seems set to decline, despite repeated commitments to the contrary. Isabelle Schulte-Tenckhoff went beyond economics to propose a holistic anthropological approach to understanding the complexities of the crisis. She further noted that looking at the situation from an anthropological perspective could offer cultural and social insights to the crisis and a more complete assessment of the situation.
Jean-Luc Maurer and Marc Hufty each brought regional perspectives to the discussion. For Maurer, the vast and varied Asian region has contributed to the crisis by engaging with the global financial markets head-on which has resulted in unparalleled rates of economic growth. In this context, he also highlighted the strengthening of regional ties and increased integration of Asia in the global arena.
For Maurer, therefore, the region has to be part of any solution. He further noted that certain countries in the region may be better placed than others to deal with the current crisis thanks to the experience of previous financial crises. This was an opinion shared by Hufty in his analysis of Latin America. Hufty also highlighted the fragility of major economies such as Brazil and Mexico that are highly integrated with global markets.
However, he did note that the current crisis may yield environmental benefits as lower growth rates in turn lead to lower demand for natural resources e. Ronald Jaubert highlighted the link between the financial crisis and food security. He cited examples of African countries that have been particularly affected.
Jaubert made the case for better regulation of agricultural prices and for devoting more attention to specific local conditions. According to Jaubert, the short-term repercussions of the crisis have yet to be fully ascertained. Socioeconomist Jean-Michel Servet drew on recent fieldwork to assess the impact of the crisis on microfinance institutions. For Servet, microfinance needs to be examined from two perspectives: Understanding the specificities of microfinance will help to determine the potential impact of the financial crisis.
For example, lending systems based on local savings programmes face fewer risks than microfinance institutions that depend on foreign capital. Certain panellists — inspired by the Chinese interpretation of the term — shared the optimistic view that the crisis could actually be an opportunity; others feared that it will result in greater protectionism and the formation of regional blocs, growing inequality, and a deepening industrial vs. The panel concluded that we are a long way from understanding a crisis that is still unfolding and whose impacts are not yet fully known.
However, development studies certainly provide a useful analytical framework for assessing the crisis with all its impacts and specificities. A total of 1, candidates from a wide range of backgrounds and nationalities applied for admission to one of the Graduate Institute's programmes for the academic year. Out of the 1, applicants, 1, candidates chose Masters programmes and applied for Ph. These figures represent a The broad range of applications proves that the Graduate Institute remains an attractive place to study and reinforces the value of conducting new and sustained recruitment campaigns.
The Institute is pleased to announce the launch of its new website. A new visual identity has been developed and the links have been reorganised to highlight the activities of the Institute, and the expertise of its faculty and research centres and programmes. This more user-friendly and dynamic site is simply the first step in a new process: The conclusions of the G20 summit held in London make the meeting neither the historic success described by participating leaders nor the failure anticipated by most observers.
The widely praised achievements of the summit are less impressive than they appeared at first. The composition of the huge figure of 5 trillion dollars to be spent to stimulate national economies by remains opaque and there is little mention of how national efforts will be coordinated. The increase in IMF resources will come mostly from commitments made by Japan and the EU before the summit and from the sale of a share of the IMF gold and thus hardly result from a historic process of convergence among the top 20 world economies.
The strong commitment to strictly regulate international financial transactions will in the main be implemented by other forums. The commitment to not resort to protectionism is ambiguous at best and the amount of money to finance trade appears out of proportion with documented needs. Yet, the 9-page declaration goes beyond a largely expected vague and general list of intentions and articulates a series of specific figures on lending, grants or stimulus plans. Even if inflated, the resources promised to the IMF, to the World Bank, and to regional development banks are a good and concrete starting point.
They also came up with a three-tiered listing of tax havens and committed to keep the pressure on those countries included in the black and grey lists. So to come back to the question at the heart of my News briefing on 31 March, the G20 summit brings mixed lessons for the future of world economic governance.
On the positive side, the G20 leaders clearly understood the importance of their role as firefighters in a severely distressed world. To reassure markets they were able to leave, at least for a while, deep disagreements over national economic priorities on the backburner and did not shy away from their huge responsibilities. This is a reassuring piece of news and appears to be a significant change from past practices. But this does not mean, however, that we should be very confident about future world economic governance.
The summit reaffirmed the centrality of existing international economic institutions, in particular the IMF, the World Bank, regional development banks as well as the WTO. But it also granted the FSB additional powers, without a clear functional or hierarchical view of the relationships with the Bank of International Settlements BIS or other regulatory or supervisory bodies.
The G20 leaders also remained opaque as to how the IMF and the World Bank would be reformed to better reflect the recent evolutions in the distribution of world economic power. Lastly, they hardly addressed how the G20 would evolve in terms of membership and of possible institutionalization. Thus, there may be hope surrounding the ability of governments to collectively overcome the current economic crisis, but prospects for improved global economic governance as yet remain unpromising.
The London summit may well be yet another illustration of ad hoc solutions that may well add confusion rather than bringing coherence to world economic governance. Hope for Global Economic Governance? As the world continues to grapple with the fallout from a financial crisis that has spread throughout the globe, there is a fear in some quarters that several wealthier industrial nations will revert to old-fashioned protectionism in an effort to stem the flow of production and jobs to other less expensive regions. And that this could be at the expense of climate change as measures to curb carbon emissions take a back seat.
Such efforts are unlikely to go unchallenged. As rumblings of protectionism get louder, the global trade regime and its foremost regulatory body, the World Trade Organisation, find themselves once again firmly in the spotlight. Professor Pauwelyn noted that on the face of it, current WTO articles could render US industry less competitive if the US decides to cut its carbon emissions while some newly emerging — and emitting — economies do not act.
However, he urged legislators to stop viewing the WTO as an excuse to not tackle climate change but showed how WTO articles and provisions could actually provide guidelines within which to draft legislation that could be used to both maintain US competitiveness while tackling carbon emissions. He pointed out that rather than constituting an obstacle to such measures, current WTO articles and provisions actually have enough flexibility and offer positive insights on how to design cost-effective climate change legislation that protects the environment without discriminating against foreign trade partners.
He will take up his new position on 1 January when the current incumbent, Jean-Pierre Roth, retires. Philipp Hildebrand, 45, a former banker, was appointed to the Board of the Swiss National Bank in and became Vice-Chairman in A graduate of the Institute as well as Oxford and Harvard universities, he has had a prestigious career in banking and academia. Hildebrand was not only a bright student but has been since a valued visiting Professor at the Graduate Institute where he has been co-teaching a class on the political economy of international finance with himself and his colleague Prof.
As President of the Bank he will head the department responsible for economic and international affairs. Philipp Hildebrand is a native German-speaker. He is also a former Swiss national swimming champion. The Graduate Institute will host the programme and faculty members will teach key courses in their areas of expertise. The curriculum and instruction will be set by Thunderbird whose faculty members will travel to Geneva to deliver their course modules. The course, which is designed for professionals from Europe and the Middle East, consists of 11 taught modules. Professors from the Graduate Institute will deliver four modules on themes related to Global Economics and Global Governance.
It is delivered through one-week residencies in Geneva, along with global residency rotations that provide exposure in China, Russia, the Middle East, and North and South America. Geneva will host participants in the programme in September, January, March and July.
This collaboration leverages the expertise of both schools to deliver the Thunderbird European EMBA and enhance joint programmes in executive education. In addition to providing teaching, the Graduate Institute will also act as an academic advisor on the world affairs modules of the programme. Such teaching partnerships create unmatched resources in international affairs and global management education worldwide and offer a practical and engaging environment for collaborative learning. Globe is a publication dedicated to life at the Institute with special emphasis on issues on which faculty members and researchers are working.
Each edition focuses on a thematic topic linking research to current events. It has a print run of 9, and is distributed in Switzerland and abroad; Globe is published twice a year October and April. In recent years, monitoring economic social and cultural rights ESC rights has become increasingly important for human rights advocates.
As non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions work hard to mainstream the realization of these rights, there is an enhanced need for professional training on this topic. Christophe Golay and Claire Mahon. The inaugural course in May , which brought together thirteen participants from the developing and developed world for five days, was a real success. I can absolutely justify the expense and time out from the office to follow this course — well done all involved! The call for participants has had an impressive response rate with applications received for 20 places.
Benefiting from the presence of experts on ESCR from the Geneva Academy and the Graduate Institute, the course is designed as a dynamic combination of lectures with hands-on practical work on real country situations. By the end of the five-day intensive training period, participants will be familiar with concepts such as justiciability and progressive realization, master the use of indicators to document violations, be able to define an advocacy strategy and to interact with UN human rights mechanisms relevant to ESCR.
In , the organizers have succeeded to ensure that external funders will provide a number of scholarships in order to enable more applicants from the developing world to participate in the course. It is hoped it will be another successful training experience! Around 60 participants attended the conference. The first day centred on a general overview of the successes and challenges encountered by NATO during the Cold War, from an historical perspective.
After a short narrative introduction to the North Atlantic Treaty, the conference went on to develop the argument that the dominance which the US enjoyed over Europe after served to shape the current trans-Atlantic system, despite being poorly understood at the time. A series of lively debates followed during which the idea of a "strategic culture" was widely discussed.
While the notion of strategic culture was seen as the softpower of European security policy, participants concluded at the same time that a transatlantic perspective of a European security identity would be incomplete in the absence of any reference to the wider Western identity. Day two of the meeting looked at transatlantic issues from the perspective of two main topics: The conference then discussed claims that the EU tends to focus on external security as part of efforts to increase European credibility with the US. Next, the conference examined institutional competition between NATO and the EU and highlighted the limits of effective multilateralism.
Speaking at the Graduate Institute on May 4, Professor Chakravorty stated that a US Cap and Trade programme was inevitable but warned that it could take years before it produced tangible results. Commenting on the international dimension of such programme, Prof Chakravorty mentioned that a potential agreement in Copenhagen would be of limited import.
Prof Chakravorty remarked that the new US administration benefited from several successful examples of Cap and Trade programmes, such as the regional GHG initiative in the Eastern states, the Western Climate Initiative and the European emissions trading scheme. He noted that such a scheme could potentially lead to business opportunities for these countries. Such programme would invariably increase energy prices, hurt lower-income families and cause the migration of jobs to environmentally laxer countries BUT Prof Chakravorty conceded that the risks associated with the latter were more perceived than real.
Nevertheless internal US politics would play a key role: Rich coal states would add their voice to the dissenting ones. This 4th workshop will be held on its premises in Geneva from 19 to 23 October It is open to scholars from the global south pursuing advanced graduate research in areas bridging the fields of international studies and development studies, broadly defined, and working in disciplines such as anthropology, history, law, politics and political science, and economics.
Scholars specialising in conflict, post-conflict societies, migration, and governance are particularly encouraged to apply. Applications from the Institute Ph. The main aim of the workshop is to help build a network of young scholars from southern countries by providing them opportunities to interact and share experiences with fellow scholars from the south, and develop collaborative frameworks and projects that may help advance the salience of southern perspectives in their fields and disciplines.
Participants will be expected to present their research at the workshop. They will also have opportunities for professional interaction with faculty and research students at the Graduate Institute, and with international and non-governmental organisations in Geneva. English will be the working language. The facilitators of the workshop include Prof.
Thomas Biersteker Political Science , Prof. Riccardo Bocco Political Sociology , Prof. Jasmine Champenois Executive Education and Dr. More information about application conditions and procedures Contact: Djalili, Le Temps, 14 mai [pdf]. Perhaps the greatest lesson that history can teach us is that sometimes the unintended consequences of our actions can have far greater impacts than the intended ones.
This was the message delivered by Margaret MacMillan, the guest speaker at the annual Europaeum Lecture. Margaret MacMillan, an international historian of global repute, was talking on the topic: A Professor and Warden of St. Introducing the topic of her lecture, Dr. MacMillan noted that although this was her first visit to Geneva, it would not be her last.
Indeed, she explained that Geneva held a particular significance for her. In fact, she revealed that the late Woodrow Wilson and David Lloyd George her great-grandfather , believing the mood in Paris to be too volatile, had originally hoped to hold the peace conference in Geneva. However, in the end, Paris won out.
Warming to the subject of her lecture Dr. In her view therefore, and one with which she deals at length in her latest book, while history can be a dangerous tool, it is often the only one we have. So, taking stock after 90 years, she asked: MacMillan started by noting that the context today is quite different from that 90 years ago.
In , leaders of the Great Powers took 6 months to draft a settlement. Today, such a lengthy meeting would be both impossible and impractical. Meetings such as the G7 or G8 tend to only last two days! Today, international meetings tend to be much more focussed for example, the Dayton Conference which dealt solely with Bosnia. She did not feel that this was an entirely fair assessment: The politicians meeting in Paris did the best they could in very difficult circumstances, an observation often ignored in hindsight. In , conditions were not conducive to peace. The world was in turmoil, there had been huge losses of life: There were even fears that World War I would be followed by a revolution similar to the Bolshevik Revolution which would turn European society on its head.
In the end, this did not happen. She argued that once strong empires were disintegrating and the people who had been part of them were now beginning to demand states and homelands of their own. It would probably be more accurate to say that the future populations of countries like Czechoslovakia dreamed them up, and that the Treaty of Versailles merely served to consolidate their borders. So, looking at the lessons to be learned, Dr. MacMillan suggested that perhaps the perceived failure of the Treaty of Versailles rested in the fact that the means to enforce its provisions were lacking.
The lesson here therefore is that modern-day peacemakers should be wary of drafting settlements they are unable to enforce. Politicians who pander to the ballot box will end up disappointing. She cited the example of David Lloyd George who ran his Winter election on a platform of revenge against Germany; this was to be fulfilled at huge cost to Germany. However, it was the language and wording of the bill which caused its downfall. Reparations payments were divided into three phases. The first payment had to be settled before a bill could be issued for the second set of payments!
This removed any incentive for Germany to pay even the first instalment. It is quite likely that the total reparations to be paid by Germany were lower than those paid by France after the Franco-Prussian War. However, the rhetoric surrounding reparations payments left the German people with the impression that they had paid too much.
MacMillan expressed a further caution for modern peacemakers: At the Paris Peace Conference, the British delegation created Iraq — essentially they pulled together portions of the disintegrating Ottoman Empire in the belief that their technological superiority, combined with a complacent local ruler, would be enough for them to maintain power. However, this did not turn out as planned. Finally, she drew attention to the fact that even under the best conditions, human errors occur. The bill approving membership was watered down as it was presented to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
While it is clear that David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau would have accepted American membership with some concessions — they were keen to have the US on board — Wilson was so stubborn about the concessions that he even convinced his own party to vote against the bill. Concluding her talk on the lessons that could be drawn, Dr. MacMillan made some suggestions for present-day historians: In history generally, never dismiss the defeated, and never assume that anything is permanent.
The GCSP was chosen as it previously organised a one-week programme on security issues for this audience. It was decided that the new course would be open to representatives from diplomatic missions in Geneva as well as officials interested in multilateral diplomacy. Some 24 participants are attending this year's course which takes place from 11 to 29 May. The main objective of the programme is to take advantage of the opportunity offered by international Geneva to place participants in real-time situations of multilateral diplomacy.
Divided into three separate modules, coordinated respectively by the Centre for International Governance and the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, sessions tackle issues of globalisation, economic integration and trade, address threats to international security, and review principles of international humanitarian law, humanitarian action and human rights.
The programme includes interactive discussions with high-level academics and experts, study visits to international organisations, hands-on sessions with practitioners, and a variety of practical exercises. The facilitators of the programme include Mr. Guided by experience and knowledge of challenges faced by the public and private sector and civil society in the new governance environment, the Centre offers training and training consultancies tailored to the needs of its partners, as well as a platform to thoroughly discuss crucial governance issues.
Violence is a complicating factor of peace negotiations, but does not make them impossible. Martti Ahtisaari has been untiring in his efforts to broker peace, a commitment acknowledged in when the Nobel Committee awarded him the peace prize for more than three decades of hard work devoted to resolving conflicts. It was therefore a huge honour when President Ahtisaari accepted an invitation of the Graduate Institute to share his experiences. President Ahtisaari, responding to this conducive setting, talked about his experiences of working in some of the world's most intractable conflict zones, including in Kosovo, Aceh, Iraq, Northern Ireland, and others.
He explored different facets of peacebuilding processes, including planning, managing on-going violence, the role and limitations of the mediator, dealing with past injustices, and designing alternative futures for ex-combatants and populations affected by conflict. Martti Ahtisaari spoke of his conviction that all conflicts can be resolved, even if such resolution does not necessarily occur through negotiation. Indeed, he reminded his audience that in all conflict settings there are spoilers who seek to undermine the process through violence.
However, he noted that while violence complicates dialogue, it does not make it impossible. In such circumstances, he explained, mediators need to ensure that they have a mandate to mediate before plunging headlong into dialogue. He noted that to be truly successful, mediation needs to have the buy-in of all parties to conflict, and that leveraging the power of all those who can potentially affect the outcome of negotiations is key.
Finally, he stressed the importance of ownership of the peace process as a key ingredient of success. He also emphasised the necessity of keeping channels of communication open as a means of managing the expectations and aspirations of all constituencies — a vital part of any lasting peace. President Ahtisaari spoke with tremendous passion and conviction and, despite the gravity of the topic, with a certain amount of humour. The event was greeted with enthusiasm by participants and the audience alike who were honoured to be given the opportunity to hear such a charismatic orator and diplomat.
For more information on the research of the CCDP see http: The first comprehensive directory of its kind, it lists 85 global health actors based in Geneva and provides essential information on their activities and health-related interests. The Actors listed in the Directory range from UN agencies to international non-governmental organisations, and from foundations to private sector companies and academic institutions.
It is intended as a practical guide for anyone interested in health matters. It confirms the importance of Geneva as a hub for global health. They discussed instruments and mechanisms to improve coherence, delivery and effectiveness of their respective national global health policies. More than 80 participants, drawn from the different delegations attended this briefing. Compte-rendu de la table ronde [anglais].
Pablo Dreyfus, accompanied by his wife Ana Carolina, and Ronald Dreyer, were among the passengers and crew travelling from Rio de Janeiro to Paris aboard the airbus A, when it vanished from the radars at 04h15 central European time. Pablo Dreyfus Pablo Dreyfus received his Ph.
His research and extensive publications on international drug trafficking, and on the small arms trade in Latin America, are internationally recognised. An Argentine national by birth, Pablo was a close collaborator with, and stalwart contributor to, the Small Arms Survey over many years. He later took his considerable experience and expertise to Rio de Janeiro where he worked for Viva Rio — an internationally-recognised NGO working on armed violence prevention and reduction.
Pablo will be remembered as a gentle and sensitive man with an upbeat sense of humour. His strong commitment to social justice on issues big and small was widely recognised and appreciated. He displayed an intellectual curiosity and a determined work ethic that excited and enthused all who worked with him.
He will be dearly missed by friends and colleagues alike. The second member of our alumni body, Ronald Dreyer, received his Ph. He was instrumental in mobilising the support of more than countries to this cause. His legacy, but more importantly his warmth and good humour, will be greatly missed by all who knew him. Early reports of the disaster seemed to indicate that the aircraft simply disappeared. Investigators are only now beginning to piece together a picture of the final moments of the vessel, which it is believed may have been disabled as a result of a lightning strike and severe weather conditions.
The students and faculty of the Graduate Institute send their condolences to the families and loved ones of both these alumni. Our thoughts are with them all at this sad and difficult time. Students have been selected on the basis of their academic records and personal interest in international affairs. During the morning sessions of the programme, participants will attend lectures delivered by faculty of the Institute on topics including Health and the Environment, Security and Human Rights, and Global and Regional Integration.
Afternoons will be devoted to workshops. These will include meetings with experts directly involved in multilateral diplomacy; role-playing exercises with simulations of negotiations scenarios; and visits to international organisations in Geneva. A Chance for Africa?
The Summer Programme and related events excluding external visits will take place on the Barton Campus. By facilitating direct interaction with faculty, fellow students and practitioners, the Summer Programme will offer participants the chance to observe first-hand multilateral diplomacy in action. We wish them a fruitful stay. Read more about our Summer Programme Contact: How do organisations ensure accountability to their constituencies?
What constitutes best practice in financial reporting to governing bodies? What common principles apply to the audit of international organisations? Why are accounting standards important? The CIG started addressing these issues in with a first workshop intended for the Geneva diplomatic community in September followed by a review meeting in September The 4 June seminar now enabled stakeholders to further discuss oversight issues and was attended by some thirty participants drawn from international organisations and their member states. Graham Miller made the case for dedicating greater attention to oversight issues.
He argued that better audits contribute to better management and better governance. Speaking on a subject he knows well, he noted that audits are not merely about financial reporting and that they should be as robust in international organisations as in the private sector. Graham Miller described how oversight, accountability and governance are linked. Lack of accountability results in blind faith, an irresponsible trait for governing bodies and member states.
IPSAS has the potential to improve this state of affairs. Moreover, it should provide more complete reporting which in turn should result in better management. Under this new system, financial reports will be annual rather than biennial; they will be more consistent; and they will conform to internationally-recognised standards. This in turn will lead to better informed decision-making. Graham Miller recognised, however, that the transition to IPSAS would require a culture change for the international organisations, and that implementation would be a long process.
Concluding his presentation, Graham Miller said a few words about governance. He noted that in his view, it is only through a real partnership between internal audit, external audit and the audit committee that better governance can be achieved. According to him, external audits constitute the only truly independent and impartial mechanism to ensure accountability of governing bodies. He delivered some timely and pertinent messages whose relevance seems to be increasing all the time given the current global economic turmoil.
Read more about the Centre for International Governance. La publication Beaucoup de religion! Il est production, processus, tentative plus que solution. Le butinage religieux est donc juste une forme de voyage. Un voyage en train de se faire. Impliquerait-il des aires de repos? Development worldwide has increasingly involved displacement. Ethiopia is no exception; population displacement resulting from development as well as conflict, drought and conservation has been on the increase since the s.
The recent history of conflict in the Horn of Africa has led to large-scale population movements of refugees, returnees, internally displaced groups and demobilized soldiers. The context of drought and food insecurity in the mids and again in the early s added a further rationale and impetus for organizing state-led resettlement programmes.
This book brings together for the first time studies of the different types of development, conflict and drought induced displacement in Ethiopia, and analyses the conceptual, methodological and experiential similarities, overlaps and differences between these various forms. The course will be given by leading experts in the field to a group of 19 young civil servants from Armenia and Georgia. It provides a platform for an in-depth analysis of international trade policy with reference to the practical challenges in a multilateral setting.
The course program is accompanied by a cultural event, a day trip, receptions and official meetings. The broad objective of the project is to promote the role of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia within international organisations, increase the accountability and transparency in the management of public affairs and to improve access to information. Courses are held alternatively in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The project also supports the capacity building of local non-governmental actors who co-organize the courses led by the CIG. The Alumni Councils are responsible for organizing workshops, seminars, round tables, social and civic events.
The Alumni Councils increase the sustainability of the CABIR project within the three countries and foster leadership and capacity building. The aim is to reward and acknowledge outstanding professional leadership, to foster a process of self-awareness among CABIR Alumni and to encourage committed officials who are working in a volatile and difficult environment.
The prize is a one-week working trip to Switzerland with the objective to create interface opportunities between CABIR leaders, the Swiss government, the international organisations in Geneva and the Diplomatic Missions of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia in Geneva. In a group of 7 laureates from the three countries will come to Switzerland from July.
It is to them that will fall the challenge of shaping a sustainable future from a world whose current economic, natural and social environments are in a state of flux. The Youth Forum is an initiative of members of the alumni, for this reason the Institute has chosen to support it. The objective is to create a dynamic setting in which participants can share their experiences and debate and develop new and innovative solutions for tackling climate change impacts. It marks the beginning of a hopefully long and fruitful partnership between the Institute and the Forum.
Close contact between the institutions will allow both to gain from the synergies created. Furthermore, the Forum has recently created a Youth Focal Point and is actively seeking to engage with young adults with a commitment to tackling pressing contemporary humanitarian challenges. This network enables exchanges of students and faculty members across institutions, academic and research cooperation, and the promotion of good practice in educational programme development.
It is key for cross-fertilisation of ideas and fostering genuine internationalism. Under the agreement, two students per year from each institution may enrol in the student exchange programme and, if selected, elect to study for a semester or a whole year in the host institution. Faculty members and administrative staff are also eligible to apply to the exchange programme which seeks to promote academic cooperation and educational development.
Teaching is bilingual with courses offered in English and Japanese. The student body is highly cosmopolitan with students drawn from throughout Asia and the rest of the world. In addition, the International Law Unit has entered into exchange programmes with the following law schools:. Exchange programmes enable participating students to spend one semester, or more, in a partner institution to broaden their academic horizons. They can obtain credits or undertake research. Selection of participants is based on academic merit. The one-year scholarship to run from 1 September to 31 August , was inspired by a research project launched by Norges Bank in The project has a two-fold ambition.
In the first instance, it is intended to compile and produce several publications on Scandinavian economic, financial and banking history to celebrate the bicentennial of the Bank in The second ambition of the project is to stimulate creative thinking and research among scholars in Norwegian institutions and to contribute to their work by providing financial support. In order to further these ambitions, Norges Bank decided to enter into a partnership with a recognised international institution whose philosophy and outlook closely mirror those of the bank and could complement the activities of Norwegian academic partners.
On October , Norges Bank organised an international workshop in cooperation with the Graduate Institute to introduce this project. Based on this most positive experience, Norges Bank has selected the Institute as its academic partner and will fund a one-year post-Doctoral Fellowship. Candidates interested in this new and exciting position must have sound knowledge of monetary and financial history from a transnational perspective, a combination of technical skills and archival expertise, be well acquainted with prominent international scholars in the field, and have expert managerial capacities.
For more information on this position and an application form, please click here [pdf]. Fin connaisseur de la question iranienne, M. Alors mieux vaut ne pas leur tendre la perche! Enjoyment of health is a fundamental human right, often taken for granted. Yet, for huge numbers of people around the world, this right is not a reality. Indeed, some areas lack the political will and infrastructure to guarantee the right to health.
Whose Role is it Anyway? They examined case studies of how they sometimes fail to do this, for example in Zimbabwe where the government has overseen the collapse of the health system and the emergence of a large-scale health crisis. They also discussed the growing importance of new global health initiatives and public-private partnerships such as the Global Fund and GAVI.
Panellists addressed the role of healthcare practitioners, as well as those of civil society, pharmaceutical companies, and global development donors. A key issue was how the World Health Organisation and other UN bodies should prioritise a rights-based approach to health and how to ensure more effective global governance in this area. It describes how realising the right to health requires a strong focus on strengthening healthcare systems and transforming health systems for women.
Taking a human rights approach to health means understanding the underlying social determinants of this right, as well as how to ensure the right to health is realised in times of emergency and armed conflict, and for all groups in society, including migrants and refugees, LGBTI persons, prisoners and detainees, and others. They address the role of governments, non-state actors and healthcare practitioners, the responses of multilateral institutions, and highlight some of the most promising strategies for realising the right to health.
A video of this event will be posted later in the week on the website of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. AlFarargi, de la Ligue des Etats arabes, S. Notre ambition est claire: On ne le dit pas assez. Actuellement, un candidat sur deux chez nous sollicite une bourse. Prospects and Challenges for Cooperation. The project aims to promote the roles of the three Southern Caucasus countries within international organisations, increase accountability and transparency in the management of public affairs and improve access to information. As part of efforts to achieve these goals, young government officials from these three nations receive training on topics including Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, International Trade Policy and the World Trade Organization, Negotiation and Diplomacy.
These Councils are intended to increase the sustainability of the CABIR project in the three countries, foster leadership and contribute towards capacity-building. They organise workshops, seminars, roundtables, social and civic events. The mission of the Centre for International Governance is to help individuals and institutions improve their performance and understanding of international governance. It offers a wide array of practical and interactive training programmes to all parties involved in international and multilateral governance.
Ce malaise, soutient T. A committee composed of Stratton Laureates is invited to recommend candidates. The current Fellowship was nominated by H. As part of his research, he plans to spend a period of time studying in the US, something this fellowship will enable him to do. Several candidates applied for the Fellowship. Stratton had a distinguished international career which included a period of study in Switzerland. The Laureates join an impressive group of former awardees.
The Graduate Institute expresses its sincere gratitude to Ambassador Staehelin for his support and generous contribution. For more information see http: Every year, the International Law Commission ILC of the United Nations organises an international law seminar, which brings together young graduates and officials from all over the world seeking to carve out an academic or diplomatic career. For the second year running, the Graduate Institute organised a session as part of this seminar.
Self-Determination and the Creation of States in Contemporary International Law were the subjects of presentations made to a captive international audience on 20 July by Professors Marcelo G. Kohen, Vera Gowlland and Mr. Speakers noted that these are all core topics of international law.
They have recently assumed greater relevance, particularly in light of the Advisory Opinion proceedings relating to the status of Kosovo brought before the International Court of Justice ICJ and that are still pending. Kohen demonstrated how the creation of a State is not simply a question of fact, but also a matter of law. Professor Vera Gowlland discussed the question of the legal status of Palestine, an issue that has recently resurfaced with the acceptance by the Palestinian Authority of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Eric Wyler looked at contemporary practices relating to state recognition and suggested a possible theoretical explanation. Profoundly interrelated to politics, state recognition is a multiform process bringing along two effects: Following the presentations, there was a question and answer session during which members of the audience displayed a keen interest in the topics presented. The tremendous diversity of the questions raised reflected the diversity of the audience: All in all, the half-day session was an opportunity for fruitful exchange between a young international audience many of whom are practitioners, concerned with the topics addressed, and lecturers keen to illustrate their thinking and demonstrate its empirical relevance.
For the Institute, active participation in the International Law Seminar of the International Law Commission of the United Nations is another example of how the institution shares its academic expertise through collaboration with a body concerned with the application of international law.
This was our second collaboration and we sincerely hope that it will continue in the future. On Friday 24 July , Dr. This event was organised as part of preparations for the upcoming G20 Summit in Pittsburgh on September Its flagship publication, a review of global small arms issues and themes, has been published annually since The first looks at the challenges inherent to ensuring security after the formal end of war. The second deals with small arms transfers, including the value of authorised trade, national controls, and weapons tracing.
It starts with an introductory section outlining the key challenges in this area, which it then goes on to illustrate through three case studies. Finally, the third case study examines perceptions of security in Southern Lebanon following the Hizbollah-Israel war. This case study notes that in an environment where the root causes of political violence persist, the population is cautious about government gun control yet surprisingly supportive of state security institutions.
Turning to the question of small arms transfers, the second theme of the survey, the report notes that the value of the global trade in small arms continues to increase, driven in no small part by continuing demand in the United States, which is both an importer and an exporter of these weapons. Using new sources of data—while expanding and refining existing sources— the authorised transfers chapter also lays the foundation for a more precise estimate of the scale of the global firearms trade in future editions.
Finally, the report underlines the potential value of tracing weapons and ammunition in conflict and post-conflict settings, though it notes that, despite modest resource implications, the international community has yet to embrace this measure. Other topics dealt with in the edition include an analysis of developments in at the United Nations.
The year that saw the emergence of new possibilities for the Programme of Action , finally also saw the inclusion of ammunition on the global arms control agenda. A review of state-sponsored disarmament, weapons collection, and destruction concludes that these activities are most effective when accompanied by a degree of formal legitimacy. The volume also reviews the impacts of small arms on children and young people. It has an international staff with expertise in security studies, political science, international public policy, law, economics, development studies, conflict resolution, and sociology.
It works closely with a worldwide network of researchers. The Survey is an independent monitor of national and international governmental and non-governmental policy initiatives on small arms.
It is a resource for governments, policy-makers, researchers, and activists and provides information and research on small arms issues. For if we don't create opportunity for all people, the disaffection and division that has stalled our progress will only sharpen in years to come. There's a second threat to our democracy — and this one is as old as our nation itself. After my election, there was talk of a post-racial America. And such a vision, however well-intended, was never realistic. Race remains a potent and often divisive force in our society.
Now, I've lived long enough to know that race relations are better than they were 10, or 20, or 30 years ago, no matter what some folks say. You can see it not just in statistics, you see it in the attitudes of young Americans across the political spectrum. But we're not where we need to be. And all of us have more work to do. If every economic issue is framed as a struggle between a hardworking white middle class and an undeserving minority, then workers of all shades are going to be left fighting for scraps while the wealthy withdraw further into their private enclaves.
If we're unwilling to invest in the children of immigrants, just because they don't look like us, we will diminish the prospects of our own children — because those brown kids will represent a larger and larger share of America's workforce. And we have shown that our economy doesn't have to be a zero-sum game. Last year, incomes rose for all races, all age groups, for men and for women. So if we're going to be serious about race going forward, we need to uphold laws against discrimination — in hiring, and in housing, and in education, and in the criminal justice system.
That is what our Constitution and our highest ideals require. But laws alone won't be enough. It won't change overnight. Social attitudes oftentimes take generations to change. For blacks and other minority groups, it means tying our own very real struggles for justice to the challenges that a lot of people in this country face — not only the refugee, or the immigrant, or the rural poor, or the transgender American, but also the middle-aged white guy who, from the outside, may seem like he's got advantages, but has seen his world upended by economic and cultural and technological change.
We have to pay attention, and listen. For white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and Jim Crow didn't suddenly vanish in the '60s — applause — that when minority groups voice discontent, they're not just engaging in reverse racism or practicing political correctness. When they wage peaceful protest, they're not demanding special treatment but the equal treatment that our Founders promised. For native-born Americans, it means reminding ourselves that the stereotypes about immigrants today were said, almost word for word, about the Irish, and Italians, and Poles — who it was said we're going to destroy the fundamental character of America.
And as it turned out, America wasn't weakened by the presence of these newcomers; these newcomers embraced this nation's creed, and this nation was strengthened. So regardless of the station that we occupy, we all have to try harder. We all have to start with the premise that each of our fellow citizens loves this country just as much as we do; that they value hard work and family just like we do; that their children are just as curious and hopeful and worthy of love as our own.
And that's not easy to do. For too many of us, it's become safer to retreat into our own bubbles, whether in our neighborhoods or on college campuses, or places of worship, or especially our social media feeds, surrounded by people who look like us and share the same political outlook and never challenge our assumptions. The rise of naked partisanship, and increasing economic and regional stratification, the splintering of our media into a channel for every taste — all this makes this great sorting seem natural, even inevitable.
And increasingly, we become so secure in our bubbles that we start accepting only information, whether it's true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that is out there. And this trend represents a third threat to our democracy. But politics is a battle of ideas. That's how our democracy was designed. In the course of a healthy debate, we prioritize different goals, and the different means of reaching them.
But without some common baseline of facts, without a willingness to admit new information, and concede that your opponent might be making a fair point, and that science and reason matter — applause — then we're going to keep talking past each other, and we'll make common ground and compromise impossible. And isn't that part of what so often makes politics dispiriting? How can elected officials rage about deficits when we propose to spend money on preschool for kids, but not when we're cutting taxes for corporations?
How do we excuse ethical lapses in our own party, but pounce when the other party does the same thing? It's not just dishonest, this selective sorting of the facts; it's self-defeating. Because, as my mother used to tell me, reality has a way of catching up with you. Take the challenge of climate change. In just eight years, we've halved our dependence on foreign oil; we've doubled our renewable energy; we've led the world to an agreement that has the promise to save this planet.
But without bolder action, our children won't have time to debate the existence of climate change. They'll be busy dealing with its effects: Now, we can and should argue about the best approach to solve the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations, it betrays the essential spirit of this country — the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our Founders.
It is that spirit, born of the Enlightenment, that made us an economic powerhouse — the spirit that took flight at Kitty Hawk and Cape Canaveral; the spirit that cures disease and put a computer in every pocket. It's that spirit — a faith in reason, and enterprise, and the primacy of right over might — that allowed us to resist the lure of fascism and tyranny during the Great Depression; that allowed us to build a post-World War II order with other democracies, an order based not just on military power or national affiliations but built on principles — the rule of law, human rights, freedom of religion, and speech, and assembly, and an independent press.
That order is now being challenged — first by violent fanatics who claim to speak for Islam; more recently by autocrats in foreign capitals who see free markets and open democracies and and civil society itself as a threat to their power. The peril each poses to our democracy is more far-reaching than a car bomb or a missile.
It represents the fear of change; the fear of people who look or speak or pray differently; a contempt for the rule of law that holds leaders accountable; an intolerance of dissent and free thought; a belief that the sword or the gun or the bomb or the propaganda machine is the ultimate arbiter of what's true and what's right. Because of the extraordinary courage of our men and women in uniform, because of our intelligence officers, and law enforcement, and diplomats who support our troops — applause — no foreign terrorist organization has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland these past eight years.
And although Boston and Orlando and San Bernardino and Fort Hood remind us of how dangerous radicalization can be, our law enforcement agencies are more effective and vigilant than ever. We have taken out tens of thousands of terrorists — including bin Laden. The global coalition we're leading against ISIL has taken out their leaders, and taken away about half their territory. ISIL will be destroyed, and no one who threatens America will ever be safe.
And to all who serve or have served, it has been the honor of my lifetime to be your Commander-in-Chief. And we all owe you a deep debt of gratitude. But protecting our way of life, that's not just the job of our military. Democracy can buckle when we give in to fear. So, just as we, as citizens, must remain vigilant against external aggression, we must guard against a weakening of the values that make us who we are. And that's why, for the past eight years, I've worked to put the fight against terrorism on a firmer legal footing.
That's why we've ended torture, worked to close Gitmo, reformed our laws governing surveillance to protect privacy and civil liberties. That's why I reject discrimination against Muslim Americans, who are just as patriotic as we are. That's why we cannot withdraw from big global fights — to expand democracy, and human rights, and women's rights, and LGBT rights. No matter how imperfect our efforts, no matter how expedient ignoring such values may seem, that's part of defending America. For the fight against extremism and intolerance and sectarianism and chauvinism are of a piece with the fight against authoritarianism and nationalist aggression.
If the scope of freedom and respect for the rule of law shrinks around the world, the likelihood of war within and between nations increases, and our own freedoms will eventually be threatened. So let's be vigilant, but not afraid. ISIL will try to kill innocent people. But they cannot defeat America unless we betray our Constitution and our principles in the fight.
Rivals like Russia or China cannot match our influence around the world — unless we give up what we stand for — applause — and turn ourselves into just another big country that bullies smaller neighbors. Which brings me to my final point: Our democracy is threatened whenever we take it for granted.
All of us, regardless of party, should be throwing ourselves into the task of rebuilding our democratic institutions. When voting rates in America are some of the lowest among advanced democracies, we should be making it easier, not harder, to vote. When trust in our institutions is low, we should reduce the corrosive influence of money in our politics, and insist on the principles of transparency and ethics in public service. When Congress is dysfunctional, we should draw our congressional districts to encourage politicians to cater to common sense and not rigid extremes.
But remember, none of this happens on its own. All of this depends on our participation; on each of us accepting the responsibility of citizenship, regardless of which way the pendulum of power happens to be swinging. Our Constitution is a remarkable, beautiful gift. But it's really just a piece of parchment. It has no power on its own. We, the people, give it power.
We, the people, give it meaning. With our participation, and with the choices that we make, and the alliances that we forge. Whether or not we stand up for our freedoms. Whether or not we respect and enforce the rule of law. That's up to us. America is no fragile thing. But the gains of our long journey to freedom are not assured. America, we weaken those ties when we allow our political dialogue to become so corrosive that people of good character aren't even willing to enter into public service; so coarse with rancor that Americans with whom we disagree are seen not just as misguided but as malevolent.
We weaken those ties when we define some of us as more American than others; when we write off the whole system as inevitably corrupt, and when we sit back and blame the leaders we elect without examining our own role in electing them. It falls to each of us to be those those anxious, jealous guardians of our democracy; to embrace the joyous task we've been given to continually try to improve this great nation of ours. Because for all our outward differences, we, in fact, all share the same proud title, the most important office in a democracy: So, you see, that's what our democracy demands.
Not just when there's an election, not just when your own narrow interest is at stake, but over the full span of a lifetime. If you're tired of arguing with strangers on the Internet, try talking with one of them in real life. If something needs fixing, then lace up your shoes and do some organizing. If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some signatures, and run for office yourself. Presuming a reservoir of goodness in other people, that can be a risk, and there will be times when the process will disappoint you. But for those of us fortunate enough to have been a part of this work, and to see it up close, let me tell you, it can energize and inspire.
And more often than not, your faith in America — and in Americans — will be confirmed. Mine sure has been. Over the course of these eight years, I've seen the hopeful faces of young graduates and our newest military officers. I have mourned with grieving families searching for answers, and found grace in a Charleston church. I've seen our scientists help a paralyzed man regain his sense of touch. I've seen wounded warriors who at points were given up for dead walk again.
I've seen our doctors and volunteers rebuild after earthquakes and stop pandemics in their tracks. I've seen the youngest of children remind us through their actions and through their generosity of our obligations to care for refugees, or work for peace, and, above all, to look out for each other. So that faith that I placed all those years ago, not far from here, in the power of ordinary Americans to bring about change — that faith has been rewarded in ways I could not have possibly imagined.
And I hope your faith has, too. Some of you here tonight or watching at home, you were there with us in , in , — applause — maybe you still can't believe we pulled this whole thing off. Let me tell you, you're not the only ones.
Michelle — applause — Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, girl of the South Side — applause — for the past 25 years, you have not only been my wife and mother of my children, you have been my best friend. You took on a role you didn't ask for and you made it your own, with grace and with grit and with style and good humor. You made the White House a place that belongs to everybody. And the new generation sets its sights higher because it has you as a role model. So you have made me proud.
And you have made the country proud. Malia and Sasha, under the strangest of circumstances, you have become two amazing young women.