| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
190751
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the federalization process and the spread of federalism in Russia after 1991. The Russian federal system has undergone several changes since the collapse of the Soviet Union. It arose as a result of several contracts signed between the federal government and the subjects. The federal structure of Russia is asymmetric and characterized by conflicts due to the system of division of power between the federal government and the subjects. The creation of an institutional mechanism was done to facilitate the application of the federal principles effectively. The President’s full control over political affairs, foreign policy and the economy can harm the successful development of the federal state in Russia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
181337
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Dalit autobiographies narrate the journey of protagonists from the ‘untouchable’ communities of India towards self-realisation and their struggle for human rights. A vigilant reading recognises the representation of animals as tropes in Dalit autobiographies that trace the reconstitution of the non-human limit of the Dalit as narrative subject. This paper reads Dalit autobiographies by Narendra Jadhav, Bama and Namdeo Nimgade to reveal the importance of animals as an analogy in Dalit literature, but then, following the work of Spivak and Derrida, it deconstructs the circulation of the hegemonic logic of the rational humanist subject in the radical gesture of Dalit subject constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
118337
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The paper sets out to analyze current trends in the nature of warfare and pinpoint the main problems of modern operational art while suggesting solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
086621
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Australia's colonisation by Britain (from 1788) was accomplished without the 'consent' of the Indigenous inhabitants, or the negotiation of any kind of treaty. The violence of the colonisers against the Indigenous inhabitants was never officially acknowledged to be a form of 'conquest' or 'war'. This was in part due to the fact that the Indigenous inhabitants of Australia were not regarded by the colonisers to be subjects against whom a war could be waged. Australia's early colonisation offers an example of the conceptual myopia in the development of European discourses of international relations. Within these discourses, warfare was seen as an increasingly disciplined form of violent engagement between the subjects of sovereign states. European thinkers thus came to see 'the subject' of war as a self-disciplined, rights-bearing individual inhabiting a civil space underwritten by relations of private property and guaranteed by the sovereign state. In this way, the subject of war was differentiated from the undisciplined violence of non-subjects - those in rebellion against their sovereign, or those who were without sovereignty altogether. By the eighteenth century, this constellation of concepts was framed by notions of civilisation which tied the subject of war to an historicised account of the difference between supposedly 'civilised' societies and so-called 'savage' peoples. In this paper I will argue that notions of civilisation are central to our understanding of the development of IR discourse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|