| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
047137
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Pinter, 1999.
|
| Description |
vii, 164p.
|
| Standard Number |
0855675382
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 044668 | 327.17/PET 044668 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
116805
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Political elites in East Asia tend to view the concept of human security with scepticism. On the one hand, broader notions of security are acknowledged. However, traditional views on sovereignty and deeply embedded norms relating to non-intervention and consensus politics have fostered conservative views towards parts of the human security agenda that challenge state/elite perspectives. This article identifies and explores this tension, and comments on the potential for different 'strands' of human security to inform future regional cooperation and dialogue, and concludes that human security's breadth continues to fuel an endless debate about its clarity and utility in East Asia. Such confusion is a challenge for its future relevance in the region, both as a conceptual tool and as a policy agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
151988
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses the Bali Process in the context of Australia’s securitised approach to migrant smuggling, and the consequences this has for both the Australia–Indonesia diplomatic relationship and the Bali Process overall. The Bali Process is the premier regional forum for combating migrant smuggling and is well placed to discuss and develop regional cooperation policies on irregular migration within the region. In particular, the Bali Process remains a key domain where Australia and Indonesia can contest and amend the norms and practices around the human rights of refugees and asylum-seekers. This article traces and analyses the emergence of Australia’s bilateral agreements for offshore processing and resettlement between 2011 and 2014, which Australian political elites aligned rhetorically to the Bali Process, but which the authors argue remain in tension with stated Bali Process objectives in terms of rights and protections for asylum-seekers and refugees. This article identifies that Australia’s security-driven policies and regional disagreements over humanitarian responsibility remain an ongoing tension within Bali Process states, and provides commentary on the implications of this for future Australian policy relating to regional cooperation on irregular migration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|