Boundary Dispute - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Boundary Dispute

The Experts below are selected from a list of 255 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Nick Megoran – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • on researching ethnic conflict epistemology politics and a central asian Boundary Dispute
    Europe-Asia Studies, 2007
    Co-Authors: Nick Megoran

    Abstract:

    Abstract Providing a critique of alarmist discussions of the danger of ethnic conflict in Kyrgyzstan, and the positivist epistemological assumptions and research practices that underpin them, this article develops an approach to researching ‘ethnicity’ and ‘ethnic conflict’ through the use of focus groups. Uzbeks and Kyrgyz in southern Kyrgyzstan expressed similar views about the closures of international boundaries, framed in terms of ethnicity. However, this was not an essentialist notion, but rather a concept of authentic ‘Uzbekness’ or ‘Kyrgyzness’ predicated primarily on the performance of endogenous kinship practices and Muslim/Soviet notions of class morality, nuanced by geography. These overlaps and discrepancies provide resources for those wishing to articulate visions of future social formations wider than the range of options currently propagated by ethnic entrepreneurs.

  • the critical geopolitics of the uzbekistan kyrgyzstan ferghana valley Boundary Dispute 1999 2000
    Political Geography, 2004
    Co-Authors: Nick Megoran

    Abstract:

    In 1999 the Uzbekistan–Kyrgyzstan Ferghana Valley Boundary became a brutal reality in the lives of borderland inhabitants, when it became the key issue in a crisis of inter-state relations. Mainstream explanations have suggested that the Soviet Boundary legacy and convergent post-Soviet macro-economic policies made conflict inevitable. Drawing on critical geopolitics theory, this paper questions the implicit determinism in these accounts, and seeks to augment them by a political analysis. It suggests that ‘the border crisis’ was the product of the interaction of complex domestic power struggles in both countries, the Boundary itself acting as a material and discursive site where elites struggled for the power to inscribe conflicting gendered, nationalistic visions of geopolitical identity. It concludes by insisting upon a moral imperative to expose and challenge the geographical underpinnings of state violence.

  • The critical geopolitics of the Uzbekistan–Kyrgyzstan Ferghana Valley Boundary Dispute, 1999–2000
    Political Geography, 2004
    Co-Authors: Nick Megoran

    Abstract:

    In 1999 the Uzbekistan–Kyrgyzstan Ferghana Valley Boundary became a brutal reality in the lives of borderland inhabitants, when it became the key issue in a crisis of inter-state relations. Mainstream explanations have suggested that the Soviet Boundary legacy and convergent post-Soviet macro-economic policies made conflict inevitable. Drawing on critical geopolitics theory, this paper questions the implicit determinism in these accounts, and seeks to augment them by a political analysis. It suggests that ‘the border crisis’ was the product of the interaction of complex domestic power struggles in both countries, the Boundary itself acting as a material and discursive site where elites struggled for the power to inscribe conflicting gendered, nationalistic visions of geopolitical identity. It concludes by insisting upon a moral imperative to expose and challenge the geographical underpinnings of state violence.

Jenny Miller Garmendia – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • the north south korea Boundary Dispute in the yellow west sea
    Marine Policy, 2003
    Co-Authors: Jon M Van Dyke, Mark J Valencia, Jenny Miller Garmendia

    Abstract:

    North and South Korea have clashed twice over their Boundary in the Yellow (West) Sea. The issue is quite complicated, resulting from differences over the validity of the Northern Limit Line (NLL) and the appropriate maritime Boundary, exacerbated by competition for valuable blue crab. This paper describes the incidents and the issues, analyzes the NLL and Boundary Disputes, and proposes possible solutions to this dangerous situation. Although the NLL is–or was–a useful temporary conflict avoidance device, treating it as a permanent maritime Boundary is not supported by legal principles and precedents. Ways forward include creating a military-free joint fishing zone with an agreed code of conduct for fishing vessels operating there.

  • The North/South Korea Boundary Dispute in the Yellow (West) Sea
    Marine Policy, 2003
    Co-Authors: Jon M Van Dyke, Mark J Valencia, Jenny Miller Garmendia

    Abstract:

    North and South Korea have clashed twice over their Boundary in the Yellow (West) Sea. The issue is quite complicated, resulting from differences over the validity of the Northern Limit Line (NLL) and the appropriate maritime Boundary, exacerbated by competition for valuable blue crab. This paper describes the incidents and the issues, analyzes the NLL and Boundary Disputes, and proposes possible solutions to this dangerous situation. Although the NLL is–or was–a useful temporary conflict avoidance device, treating it as a permanent maritime Boundary is not supported by legal principles and precedents. Ways forward include creating a military-free joint fishing zone with an agreed code of conduct for fishing vessels operating there.

Don Anton – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • negotiating the settlement of the timor sea Boundary Dispute between australia and timor leste
    Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy, 2017
    Co-Authors: Don Anton

    Abstract:

    Australia’s relationship with independent Timor Leste – and before that with Portugal as the administering power over the territory of East Timor under Chapter xiii of the Charter of the United Nations – has been fraught for decades, driven by a disagreement over the delimitation of a Timor Sea maritime Boundary that divides the opposite coastlines of both countries. This brief note considers the impact of the compulsory conciliation proceedings initiated by Timor Leste against Australia, under Article 298(1)(a)(i) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in April 2016, on this long-standing disagreement. It indicates that the resumption of delimitation negotiations gives reason for hope, but cautions that Indonesia should be included in the negotiations given uncertainties the surround the Indonesian lateral Boundary.

  • compulsory conciliation of the long running timor sea Boundary Dispute between timor leste and australia
    Social Science Research Network, 2016
    Co-Authors: Don Anton

    Abstract:

    In April 2016, Timor-Leste initiated compulsory conciliation proceedings against Australia under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This is the first time a Conciliation Commission has been constituted for the purpose of aiding the settlement of a maritime Boundary Dispute under UNCLOS. This brief comment considers possible arguments about the competence of the Commission and the admissibility of the Timor-Leste’s claim.