Search

Kazakhstan has followed a foreign policy of multivector diplomacy since its independence from the former Soviet Union. While multivectorism was a strategy of necessity in its early years, it has evolved to empower Kazakhstan to effectively protect its independence and negotiate its relationship with the great powers on its borders and further afield. After the 2014 Russian seizure of Crimea it is noteworthy that Kazakhstan has maintained positive relations with Russia while asserting its sovereignty and independent foreign policy. In this article we investigate how Kazakhstan has negotiated the rise of China, taking advantage of the economic opportunities it presents. We trace the foreign policy of Kazakhstan from independence forward, examining its relationships with its Great Power neighbours and its role in international organizations and negotiations. We posit that multivectorism is similar to the strategy of omni-enmeshment and complex balancing seen in south-east Asia. Both are effective methods for secondary powers to protect their sovereignty and to coexist with Great Powers without becoming their client states. Kazakhstan's approach to foreign policy is an exemplar for secondary states. This article contributes to the literature on the strategic decision-making of secondary powers and to the theoretical analysis of the foreign policy of Kazakhstan during a critical moment of transition from the long-time rule of Nursultan Nazarbayev to the presidency of Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The property rights of children is an understudied area that straddles the development/humanitarian divide. Access to assets is important to the livelihood choices and economic well-being of adults. Yet, adults' ability to claim property can be significantly impaired by humanitarian emergencies that occurred in their youth. We typically do not think of children as economic actors because of their age; their property rights are future rights not yet realized. This paper addresses the future rights to property held by children and examines how fragile environments, characterized by conflict, displacement and disease, can undermine their ability to claim those rights when they become adults, thus depriving them of assets. We identify two types of responses that can begin to address this problem: (1) legal changes to protect children's assets when guardianship is lost; and (2) actions that can be taken by humanitarian organizations to identify children's assets and protect them through conflict and displacement. This is a particularly salient topic at the current time when the numbers of displaced people are higher than any time previously recorded, and half of the displaced are children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forced migration has become commonplace in the international political landscape. In 2015, 60 million people were displaced by violence, more than ever before recorded ( UNHCR, 2015). While we know that violence leads to displacement, we know little about return migration after conflict - who comes back and where they settle. This article seeks to engage and supplement the literature on return migration after conflict, advocating for a broader understanding of the security choices made by displaced people. Emphasized here is the importance of a local understanding of safety and the role played by enclave communities in providing a secure context in which people can enjoy the society of their co-ethnics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Mass displacement of people due to violence poses a unique set of challenges for property restitution when people return to their homes after a long absence. This is particularly evident in rural areas where the dominant form of land holding is customary tenure. Violence-induced displacement, unlike voluntary migration, challenges both customary and public legal-administrative structures. The lack of written documentation of customary holdings and the importance of the support of community leaders means that incorporating returnees back into a community can be easier for those who choose to return, while reclaiming property without physical return is nearly impossible. This article seeks to make three contributions: 1) to note the diversity of return processes after long displacements in terms of timing and demographics; 2) to demonstrate that the nature of the claims people can make on customary tenure systems is at odds with international legal norms on property restitution after displacement; and 3) to introduce a set of observations and questions on how conflict can change customary law. The article is based on fieldwork conducted in Uganda, Liberia and Timor-Leste, all countries with extended displacement where most of the rural land is held via customary claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kosovo is one of several Western Balkan countries that are part of the next round of accession to the EU. Like Bosnia, Serbia, and Croatia, it is also a country in which the history of conflict is recent and the benefits of EU membership ought to be a strong economic and political enticement to meet the standards necessary for membership. Yet, instead of major transformation of the post-conflict society towards democratization, economic development, and a robust human rights regime, the prospect of European Union membership appears to be leading to superficial legal changes without enforcement. This article investigates the tensions between internal challenges to legal change and external pressures for reform, adding to the literature on the decoupling of Europeanization and domestic change in candidate countries. A short analysis of one policy area, women’s property rights, illuminates the gaps between legal change and enforcement processes. The article also considers how and when a change in law can lead to social change. It is argued here that legal change in response to EU conditionalities may begin superficially, but creates an opportunity for collective action that can eventually lead to democratic change and a more robust enforcement of law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Customary law is an alternative legal framework to statute or public law. In the past, the existence of customary law was viewed as problematic due to the uncertainty which accompanies legal pluralism. Increasingly, scholars are recognizing legal pluralism as simply a reality to be negotiated, rather than a problem. One frequently proposed solution to the difficulties posed by the existence of customary law is to write it down, or ascertain it, in order to provide for legal certainty. This article addresses this goal in three parts. The first part describes customary law and how it functions in its uncodified form in post-colonial settings, specifically in Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia. While customary law thrived under colonization, it merely survived socialism where it was often explicitly undermined. The second part of the article details the reasons why scholars and public officials have often suggested writing customary law down as a solution, and situates these arguments within the contemporary debate on legal pluralism. In the third section, a specific case of written customary law, the Albanian Kanun of Lekë Dukagjini, is analyzed with a focus on its modem usage in a post-socialist context. The paper concludes noting that ascertainment does not bring legal certainty to customary law in the ways that are anticipated. Writing down an oral tradition or a practice may produce a document for reference, but this does not limit its use nor necessarily increases the predictability of its application. The article also emphasizes the role of customary law in defining group identity in post-socialist settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is currently in international law an overstatement of the tie between property and identity. International conventions have folded property into a set of immutable human rights. There needs to be greater flexibility and nuance in this perspective. In this article, we identify two approaches to property rights: the first, which argues that property and identity are necessarily bundled together and considers property to be a human right; and the second, which understands them as explicitly separate and views property as a commodity. Empirically, we observe a transition between these two competing ideas. We posit that this transition happens voluntarily, with market development, or involuntarily through displacement due to conflict and disaster. The relationship between property and identity changes based on time, circumstance, and individual choice. Rights-based norms regarding property, and more specifically the restitution of property after displacement, need to be sufficiently flexible to encompass changes in identity and context. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article offers information about the gacaca courts in Rwanda, which were established to rectify genocide and assess the guilt or innocence of the people held in jails. The courts, which are held outside on the grass or gacaca under shelters, involve listing all the people present in an area before the genocide, those were killed and the accused. The gacaca courts are considered as the best option for trial for being more efficient in enlisting the support and participation of local communities. However, many people fear that the gacaca courts will only serve to open old wounds and retraumatize those who have already suffered.