Table of Contents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Whither Communism: a Comparative Perspective on Constitutionalism in a Postsocialist Cuba Jon L
University of Florida Levin College of Law UF Law Scholarship Repository UF Law Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 2009 Whither Communism: A Comparative Perspective on Constitutionalism in a Postsocialist Cuba Jon L. Mills University of Florida Levin College of Law, [email protected] Daniel Ryan Koslosky Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Jon Mills & Daniel Ryan Koslosky, Whither Communism: A Comparative Perspective on Constitutionalism in a Postsocialist Cuba, 40 Geo. Wash. Int'l L. Rev. 1219 (2009), available at, http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/522 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UF Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WHITHER COMMUNISM: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON CONSTITUTIONALISM IN A POSTSOCIALIST CUBA JON MILLS* AND DANIEL RYAN KOSLOSIc4 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1220 II. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ............................ 1222 A. Cuban ConstitutionalLaw .......................... 1223 1. Precommunist Legacy ........................ 1223 2. Communist Constitutionalism ................ 1225 B. Comparisons with Eastern Europe ................... 1229 1. Nationalizations in Eastern Europe ........... 1230 2. Cuban Expropriations ........................ 1231 III. MODES OF CONSTITUTIONALISM: A SCENARIO ANALYSIS. 1234 A. Latvia and the Problem of ConstitutionalInheritance . 1236 1. History, Revolution, and Reform ............. 1236 2. Resurrecting an Ancien Rgime ................ 1239 B. Czechoslovakia and Poland: Revolutions from Below .. 1241 1. Poland's Solidarity ........................... 1241 2. Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution ........... 1244 3. New Constitutionalism ....................... 1248 C. Hungary's GradualDecline and Decay .............. -
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations Updated November 9, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R41368 SUMMARY R41368 Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations November 9, 2020 U.S.-Turkey tensions have raised questions about the future of bilateral relations and have led to congressional action against Turkey, including informal holds on major new Jim Zanotti arms sales (such as upgrades to F-16 aircraft) and efforts to impose sanctions. Specialist in Middle Nevertheless, both countries’ officials emphasize the importance of continued U.S.- Eastern Affairs Turkey cooperation and Turkey’s membership in NATO. Observers voice concerns about the largely authoritarian rule of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Clayton Thomas Turkey’s polarized electorate could affect Erdogan’s future leadership. His biggest Analyst in Middle Eastern challenge may be structural weaknesses in Turkey’s economy—including a sharp Affairs decline in Turkey’s currency—that have worsened since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic began. The following are key factors in the U.S.-Turkey relationship. Turkey’s strategic orientation and U.S./NATO basing. Traditionally, Turkey has relied closely on the United States and NATO for defense cooperation, European countries for trade and investment, and Russia and Iran for energy imports. A number of complicated situations in Turkey’s surrounding region—including those involving Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh (a region disputed by Armenia and Azerbaijan), and Eastern Mediterranean energy exploration—affect its relationships with the United States and other key actors, as Turkey seeks a more independent role. President Erdogan’s concerns about maintaining his parliamentary coalition with Turkish nationalists may partly explain his actions in some of the situations mentioned above. -
Kazakhstan Missile Chronology
Kazakhstan Missile Chronology Last update: May 2010 As of May 2010, this chronology is no longer being updated. For current developments, please see the Kazakhstan Missile Overview. This annotated chronology is based on the data sources that follow each entry. Public sources often provide conflicting information on classified military programs. In some cases we are unable to resolve these discrepancies, in others we have deliberately refrained from doing so to highlight the potential influence of false or misleading information as it appeared over time. In many cases, we are unable to independently verify claims. Hence in reviewing this chronology, readers should take into account the credibility of the sources employed here. Inclusion in this chronology does not necessarily indicate that a particular development is of direct or indirect proliferation significance. Some entries provide international or domestic context for technological development and national policymaking. Moreover, some entries may refer to developments with positive consequences for nonproliferation. 2009-1947 March 2009 On 4 March 2009, Kazakhstan signed a contract to purchase S-300 air defense missile systems from Russia. According to Ministry of Defense officials, Kazakhstan plans to purchase 10 batteries of S-300PS by 2011. Kazakhstan's Air Defense Commander Aleksandr Sorokin mentioned, however, that the 10 batteries would still not be enough to shield all the most vital" facilities designated earlier by a presidential decree. The export version of S- 300PS (NATO designation SA-10C Grumble) has a maximum range of 75 km and can hit targets moving at up to 1200 m/s at a minimum altitude of 25 meters. -
Black-Jewish Coalition” Unraveled: Where Does Israel Fit?
The “Black-Jewish Coalition” Unraveled: Where Does Israel Fit? A Master’s Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Brandeis University Hornstein Jewish Professional Leadership Program Professors Ellen Smith and Jonathan Krasner Ph.D., Advisors In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by Leah Robbins May 2020 Copyright by Leah Robbins 2020 Acknowledgements This thesis was made possible by the generous and thoughtful guidance of my two advisors, Professors Ellen Smith and Jonathan Krasner. Their content expertise, ongoing encouragement, and loving pushback were invaluable to the work. This research topic is complex for the Jewish community and often wrought with pain. My advisors never once questioned my intentions, my integrity as a researcher, or my clear and undeniable commitment to the Jewish people of the past, present, and future. I do not take for granted this gift of trust, which bolstered the work I’m so proud to share. I am also grateful to the entire Hornstein community for making room for me to show up in my fullness, and for saying “yes” to authentically wrestle with my ideas along the way. It’s been a great privilege to stretch and grow alongside you, and I look forward to continuing to shape one another in the years to come. iii ABSTRACT The “Black-Jewish Coalition” Unraveled: Where Does Israel Fit? A thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Brandeis University Waltham, Massachusetts By Leah Robbins Fascination with the famed “Black-Jewish coalition” in the United States, whether real or imaginary, is hardly a new phenomenon of academic interest. -
<K>EXTRACTS from the REPORT on the TRIPARTITE
Volume 8. Occupation and the Emergence of Two States, 1945-1961 Excerpts from the Report on the Potsdam Conference (Potsdam Agreement) (August 2, 1945) The Potsdam Conference between the leaders of the Soviet Union, the United States, and Great Britain was held at Cecilienhof Palace, the home of Crown Prince Wilhelm Hohenzollern, in Potsdam, Germany, from July 17 to August 2, 1945. The Soviet Union was represented by Josef Stalin; the U.S. was represented by President Harry S. Truman, who had only been in office for a few months, having succeeded Franklin Delano Roosevelt on April 12, 1945. Winston Churchill represented Great Britain at the start of the conference, but after the Labor Party won the elections of July 27, 1945, he was replaced by the new prime minister, Clement R. Attlee, who signed the agreement on behalf of Great Britain on August 2, 1945. The agreement reached by Stalin, Truman, and Attlee formed the basis of Allied occupation policy in the years to come. The provisions with the most far-reaching consequences included those concerning borders. It was agreed, for example, that the Oder- Neisse line would be established as Poland’s provisional western boundary, meaning that Poland would undergo a “western shift” at the expense of German territories in Pomerania, Silesia, and Eastern Prussia. It was also agreed that the territory around East Prussian Königsberg would be ceded to the Soviet Union. In addition, the conference settled upon the “transfer” of Germans from the new Polish territories and from Czechoslovakia and Hungary. These measures constituted an essential basis for the division of Germany and Europe. -
Primary Source Document with Questions (Dbqs) the POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction the Dropping of the Atomic Bo
Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs) THE POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains among the most controversial events in modern history. Historians have actively debated whether the bombings were necessary, what effect they had on bringing the war in the Pacific to an expeditious end, and what other options were available to the United States. These very same questions were also contentious at the time, as American policymakers struggled with how to use a phenomenally powerful new technology and what the long-term impact of atomic weaponry might be, not just on the Japanese, but on domestic politics, America’s international relations, and the budding Cold War with the Soviet Union. In retrospect, it is clear that the reasons for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, just like the later impact of nuclear technology on world politics, were complex and intertwined with a variety of issues that went far beyond the simple goal of bringing World War II to a rapid close. The Potsdam Declaration was issued on July 26, 1945 by U.S. President Harry Truman, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China, who were meeting in Potsdam, Germany to consider war strategy and post-war policy. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin also attended the Potsdam Conference but did not sign the Declaration, since the Soviet Union did not enter the war against Japan until August 8, 1945. Document Excerpts with Questions From Japan’s Decision to Surrender, by Robert J.C. -
The Marshall Plan and the Cold War ______
Background Essay: The Marshall Plan and the Cold War _____________________________________________ The Cold War was fought with words and threats rather than violent action. The two nations at war were the United States and the Soviet Union. Although the two superpowers had worked as allies to defeat Germany during World War II, tensions between them grew after the war. Feelings of mistrust and resentment began to form as early as the 1945 Potsdam Conference, where Harry S. Truman and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin met. Stalin was interested in expanding Russia’s power into Eastern Europe, and the U.S. feared that Russia was planning to take over the world and spread the political idea of Communism. Truman’s response to the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence and current conditions of war-torn Europe would become known as the Truman Doctrine. This doctrine proposed to give aid to countries that were suffering from the aftermath of World War II and threatened by Soviet oppression. The U.S. was especially concerned about Greece and Turkey. Due to the slow progress of Europe’s economic development following WWII, Truman devised another plan to offer aid called the Marshall Plan. The plan was named after Secretary of State George Marshall due to Truman’s respect for his military achievements. Truman hoped that by enacting the Marshall Plan two main goals would be accomplished. These goals were: 1.) It would lead to the recovery of production abroad, which was essential both to a vigorous democracy and to a peace founded on democracy and freedom, and which, in the eyes of the United States, the Soviet Union had thus far prevented. -
Guide to Material at the LBJ Library Pertaining to Foreign Aid and Food
LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON L I B R A R Y & M U S E U M www.lbjlibrary.org Revised December 2010 FOREIGN AID, FOOD FOR PEACE, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA, AFRICA, AND LATIN AMERICA INTRODUCTION This guide lists the principal files at the Johnson Library that contain material on foreign aid (excluding military assistance programs), food for peace, and economic development in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, but it is not exhaustive. Researchers should also consult the regional guide for additional materials on the geographic areas in which they are interested. While most of the collections listed in the guide have been processed and are available for research, some files may not yet be available. Researchers should consult the Library’s finding aids to locate additional material and to determine whether specific files are available for research. Some of the finding aids are on the Library’s web site, www.lbjlibrary.org, and many others can be sent by mail or electronically. Researchers interested in the topics covered by this guide should also consult the Foreign Relations of the United States. This multi-volume series published by the Office of the Historian of the Department of State presents the official documentary historical record of major foreign policy decisions and diplomatic activity of the United States government. The volumes are available online at the Department of State web site, http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments. NATIONAL SECURITY FILE (NSF) This file was the working file of President Johnson’s special assistants for national security affairs, McGeorge Bundy and Walt W. -
UWOMJ Volume 23, Number 1, January 1953 Western University
Western University Scholarship@Western University of Western Ontario Medical Journal Digitized Special Collections 1-1953 UWOMJ Volume 23, Number 1, January 1953 Western University Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/uwomj Part of the Medicine and Health Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Western University, "UWOMJ Volume 23, Number 1, January 1953" (1953). University of Western Ontario Medical Journal. 140. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/uwomj/140 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Digitized Special Collections at Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Western Ontario Medical Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. University of Western Ontario , MEDICAL JOURNAL Pt~blish•J Q~~Mtn/1 b1 The Hippocratic Society of the .. University of Western Ontario Medical School Authorized a.s Second Oa.ss Mail by the Post Office Departmeot at Ottawa 'U o~ . J.. ?J - rq6"?J STAFF Editors-in-Chief: J. D . PRouD, B.A., '53 J. E. TwELVES, B.A., '53 Editor: E. ]. PRoKIPCHUK1 '54 Assi.rtant Editor: ]. MoRRISON, B.A., '55 Managing Editor: L. J. LoEB, B.Sc., M.Sc., '54 Circulation and Subscription Managers: R. BENNETf, '54 A. BURNETI, B.A., '54 K. McKNIGHT, B.A., '55 Exchange Editor: MARION DENNIS, B.A., '53 Book Review Editor: BARBARA GARWOOD, '56 Abstract Editor: FAYE AltUNDBLL, '55 Alumni Correspondent: E. GusPIN, B.A., '55 Consulting Editors: R. G. E. MURRAY, M.D.C.M., M.A. E. M. WATSON, M.D., M.Sc., F.R.C.P., F.R.C.P. -
Copy of Age Eligibility from 6 April 10
Check this table to see what date you will be eligible for the older person's Freedom Pass Date you are eligible for the Earliest date you can older person's Freedom apply for your older Date of Birth Pass person's Freedom Pass 06 April 1950 to 05 May 1950 06 May 2010 22 April 2010 06 May 1950 to 05 June 1950 06 July 2010 22 June 2010 06 June 1950 to 05 July 1950 06 September 2010 23 August 2010 06 July 1950 to 05 August 1950 06 November 2010 23 October 2010 06 August 1950 to 05 September 1950 06 January 2011 23 December 2010 06 September 1950 to 05 October 1950 06 March 2011 20 February 2011 06 October 1950 to 05 November 1950 06 May 2011 22 April 2011 06 November 1950 to 05 December 1950 06 July 2011 22 June 2011 06 December 1950 to 05 January 1951 06 September 2011 23 August 2011 06 January 1951 to 05 February 1951 06 November 2011 23 October 2011 06 February 1951 to 05 March 1951 06 January 2012 23 December 2011 06 March 1951 to 05 April 1951 06 March 2012 21 February 2012 06 April 1951 to 05 May 1951 06 May 2012 22 April 2012 06 May 1951 to 05 June 1951 06 July 2012 22 June 2012 06 June 1951 to 05 July 1951 06 September 2012 23 August 2012 06 July 1951 to 05 August 1951 06 November 2012 23 October 2012 06 August 1951 to 05 September 1951 06 January 2013 23 December 2012 06 September 1951 to 05 October 1951 06 March 2013 20 February 2013 06 October 1951 to 05 November 1951 06 May 2013 22 April 2013 06 November 1951 to 05 December 1951 06 July 2013 22 June 2013 06 December 1951 to 05 January 1952 06 September 2013 23 August 2013 06 -
GENERAL AGREEMENT on • ^ TARIFFS and TRADE 3 February 1953 Limited Distribution
T5TP PJTTÎT C TRD GENERAL AGREEMENT ON • ^ TARIFFS AND TRADE 3 February 1953 Limited Distribution REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL SITUATION AS AT 31 JANUARY 1953 The statements attached give information on the actual inoome and expenditure for the financial year 1952, on the outstanding contributions as at 31 January 1953 and on current contributions reoeived before 31 January. A table showing the actual expenditure of ICITO/GATT from 1948 onwards is also attached. Report on the Financial Situation as at 31 January 1953 (in U^S. dollars) CD ro Preliminary actual income and expenditure of the financial year 1952 Total Incoes 0 398,114,78 Tctal Expenditure " 262.045.23 Disposable Surplus transferred to Reserve g 136.069.55 Outstanding ocntribut:ons for previous years - g 28.596.33 a) Contracting Parties: Tîtal cf contributions Country 1948-49 1950 1951 1952 outstanding China 3,750,- 10,601.72 14,351.72 Peru 2,687.25 2,669.25 5,356.50 Syria 2.653.43 2.687.25 5.337.68 Tctal 3.750.- 13.252.15 5.374.50 2.669.25 25.545.90 b) Acceding Governments: Total of contributions Country 1948-49 1950 1951 1952 outstanding Uruguay 900.- 2.650.43 3.550.43 T^tal 900.- 2.650.43 3.550.43 Statement of contributions received and contributions outstanding as at 31 January 1953 a) 1953 contributions received as at 31 January 1053' 0 71,788,33 = 21,.45% b) 1953 contributions of Contracting Parties outstanding as at 31 January 1953 0 270,211.67 = 76.98% c) contributions becoming due ca. -
Events That Led to the Czechoslovakian Prague Spring and Its Immediate Aftermath
Trinity College Trinity College Digital Repository Senior Theses and Projects Student Scholarship Spring 2015 Events that led to the Czechoslovakian Prague Spring and its immediate aftermath Natalie Babjukova Trinity College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses Recommended Citation Babjukova, Natalie, "Events that led to the Czechoslovakian Prague Spring and its immediate aftermath". Senior Theses, Trinity College, Hartford, CT 2015. Trinity College Digital Repository, https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses/469 Events that led to the Czechoslovakian Prague Spring and its immediate aftermath Senior thesis towards Russian major Natalie Babjukova Spring 2015 ` The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the Soviet Union on August 21 st 1968 dramatically changed not only Czech domestic, as well as international politics, but also the lives of every single person in the country. It was an intrusion of the Soviet Union into Czechoslovakia that no one had expected. There were many events that led to the aggressive action of the Soviets that could be dated way back, events that preceded the Prague Spring. Even though it is a very recent topic, the Cold War made it hard for people outside the Soviet Union to understand what the regime was about and what exactly was wrong about it. Things that leaked out of the country were mostly positive and that is why the rest of the world did not feel the need to interfere. Even within the country, many incidents were explained using excuses and lies just so citizens would not want to revolt. Throughout the years of the communist regime people started realizing the lies they were being told, but even then they could not oppose it.