No presenta resumen

La política internacional latinoamericana experimenta un saludable clima de cooperación, negociación y conciliación, en el cual las distintas visiones sobre los modelos económicos y políticos parecen estar comenzando a tolerarse mutuamente. Si bien a mediados de julio pasado hubo un fuerte intercambio entre los gobiernos de Colombia y Venezuela, que incluso llegó a tratarse en el marco de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA) y motivó gran preocupación en la región, hoy el panorama es más positivo. En palabras de la ministra de Relaciones Exteriores de Colombia, María Ángela Holguín, «el tema de Colombia y Venezuela se volvió un asunto regional», y los países de la región reaccionaron con eficacia, recurriendo a la mediación y a la diplomacia para desactivar la crisis.

Páginas 11-66

No description

No description

The Responsibility to Protect has been presented as a new doctrine—a less aggressive version of humanitarian intervention—that would help the international community face the grave humanitarian crises and the massive human rights violations of the last three decades. However, there is a conflict between the general prohibition of the use of force and the new doctrine when the latter is applied without UN Security Council authorisation. This article analyses the scope and pertinence of the Responsibility to Protect, concluding that it must be understood within the frame of the UN Charter and the general prohibition of the use of force. The strengthening of both the Security Council and the relevant international regimes seems to be the best way to deal with such crises, where as according to current international public law a new exception to the general prohibition—such as ...

The Responsibility to Protect has been presented as a new doctrine —a less aggressive version of humanitarian intervention— that would help the international community face the grave humanitarian crises and the massive human rights violations of the last three decades. However, there is a conflict between the general prohibition of the use of force and the new doctrine when the latter is applied without UN Security Council authorisation. This article analyses the scope and pertinence of the Responsibility to Protect, concluding that it must be understood within the frame of the UN Charter and the general prohibition of the use of force. The strengthening of both the Security Council and the relevant international regimes seems to be the best way to deal with such crises, where as according to current international public law a new exception to the general prohibition —such ...

No description

No description

The Responsibility to Protect has been presented as a new doctrine—a less aggressive version of humanitarian intervention—that would help the international community face the grave humanitarian crises and the massive human rights violations of the last three decades. However, there is a conflict between the general prohibition of the use of force and the new doctrine when the latter is applied without UN Security Council authorisation. This article analyses the scope and pertinence of the Responsibility to Protect, concluding that it must be understood within the frame of the UN Charter and the general prohibition of the use of force. The strengthening of both the Security Council and the relevant international regimes seems to be the best way to deal with such crises, where as according to current international public law a new exception to the general prohibition—such as ...