CONTEXT-SPECIFIC NEEDS OF (STREET) WORKING CHILDREN AND UNIVERSAL LEGAL PROTECTIONS SANCTIONS: AND WHY THEY DON’T WORK (VERY WELL) RECLAIMING THE KELLOGG-BRIAND PACT

UN Photo/ Albert Gonzalez Farran

Issue 35 – September 2014

FEATURE ONE | 5

FEATURE TWO | 8 FEATURE THREE | 12 CALL FOR PAPERS | 15 OPPORTUNITIES & ANNOUNCEMENTS | 16 PUBLIC LECTURES &

CONFERENCES | 17 UNAA EVENTS | 18 PUBLICATIONS | 19 THE BEST OF WHAT’S AROUND | 20

Welcome to the September edition of the UNAA’s Academic Network Newsletter. As world leaders gather in New York to address the 69th General Assembly we are reminded of the prominence of our organization as the centerpiece for international diplomacy. I have always enjoyed this moment of the year, when the leaders of countries are able to gather and clearly announce to the world their vision for the next year, regardless of their size, wealth, or military power. I have always felt that it serves as a reminder of the common quest of humankind to strive for greater cooperation, and ultimately a peaceful world. Hopefully, I’m not the only one! The Newsletter has continued to expand over the last month. In this edition we are offering you three feature articles. The first from Emerging Scholar – Aliya Abbasi – looks towards the controversies surrounding child labour. In Context-Specific Needs of (Street) Working Children and Universal Legal Protections, Aliya questions whether the imposition of a ban on child labour serves the best interest of the child. Aliya contends that ‘that legal provisions that narrowly aim to minimize the number of “child labor” fail to take into account the variety of factors due to which children work in both formal and informal sectors (with or without their consent)’. Continued over 3

Aliya’s article seeks an ‘environment which is benevolent for the protection of their rights while ensuring their immediate survival is also protected’. Aliya is a current participant in the Emerging Scholars Programme and as such would welcome any queries or comments you may be able to provide her in relation to her intriguing field of research. This month’s second feature is from Early Career Researcher – Dr Peter Nadin – who has kindly allowed us to republish his article which was originally crafted for the United Nations University. In Sanctions: and Why They Don’t Work (Very Well) Dr Nadin contends that there are two reasons for ineffective sanctions. First, the viability of the sanctions being imposed and second, the willingness of others to enforce the sanctions. The final feature this month comes from an established scholar – Dr James Page. Dr Page, a member of the UNAA Academic Network, and Adjunct Associate Professor at UNE, has recently been announced as the joint winner in the this year's Peace Essay Contest, sponsored by the West Suburban Faith Based Peace Coalition. The

Coalition is a non-profit peace organization based in Chicago, and is one of the most active of peace organisations in the USA. The annual Peace Essay Contest is one the major outreach activities of the organisation. In conclusion, I am happy to mention that the transition of the Newsletter to ISSUU appears to have been successful with almost 230 reads of our last edition. As always I welcome and encourage your feedback pertaining to this month’s Newsletter. Please don’t hesitate to contact me should you have anything to include, be it an article, announcement, or a suggestions for the Best of What’s Around. The Network can be reached via Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/unacademicnetwork) or email (academicnetwork@unaa.org.au)

Mark Dinnen

4

While the welfare of children and the protection of their rights and entitlements have generally been considered to be the remit of national policies and politics, globalization has pushed these concerns beyond national boundaries. At the same time, conceptions of childhood, children’s needs, their role in society, and the appropriateness of their presence in public and private places remain diverse and controversial. The controversies surround not least the current legal instruments that focus on children and their rights, such as United Nations Convention on Children’s Rights, 1989 (CRC) along with International Labour Organization’s (ILO) child labour conventions that set the standards regarding child well-being. The CRC provides some core principles in relation to children’s well-being (Sedletzki, 2012) that aims at ensuring basic rights of all children including the right to survival (Art. 6), shelter (Art. 20), health, food, and clothing (Art. 24, 27), free primary education (Art. 28, 29), and protection from hazardous work (Art.32).

Collectively, the Conventions highlight the recognition of the importance of children’s welfare and rights. They can also be seen to frame the debate and discourse about childhood and children’s welfare, and can be seen as influencing national and international policies regarding children. Importantly, collectively these conventions define children as subjects of rights rather then mere objects of development. International and national policies influence the lives of millions of children world-wide. One of the biggest issues facing many children and especially poor children (persons less than 18 years old under the CRC) in the world is their need to work in order to earn a livelihood. Although controversial, work of this nature is broadly referred as “child labour”. Recent estimates by ILO suggest considerable progress in minimizing the number of child laborers from 215 million in 2008 (UNICEF, 2012) to 168 million in 2012 ("Making progress against child labour: Global estimates and trends 2000-2012," 2013, p. 5).

Aliya Abbasi is a PhD candidate at the School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland. Aliya studied an MA at Central European University, Hungary, her research interests include children’s rights and child labour. For further enquiries please contact Aliya: aliya.abbasi@uq.net.au

ALIYA ABBASI

Context-Specific Needs of (Street) Working Children and Universal Legal Protections

FEATURE ONE

5

EMERGING SCHOLAR

FEATURE ONE

About 85 million children are involved in work hazardous to their “health, safety, and moral development” (ibid). However, despite such indicators suggesting progress globally and at an aggregate level, it is important to consider variations at the national levels. For example, in Pakistan national level survey (with conceptual and measurement flaws) conducted in 1996 estimated that 3.3 million in the age group of five to fourteen were involved in child labour ("Child labour and responses, overview note - Pakistan,"). Male child workers outnumbered female child workers by 73 per cent, but the gender dimensions like the involvement of girls in work within household point to severe distortions in sampling, due to the relative ‘invisibility’ of household activities for the surveys in question. Furthermore, according to unofficial sources, the actual number of child labourers increased considerably and reached 10 million by 2010 ("Ten million engaged in child labour in Pakistan," 2010). The national and international policy responses dealing with the problem range from setting a minimum age allowed for “light work” to the abolition of “hazardous” form of child labour by restricting certain activities (Grootaert & Kanbur, 1995). One of the most common policy responses is to consider banning child labor, but such initiatives typically remain unsuccessful because they are undertaken without integrally considering the reasons for why children end up in the labor markets in the first place.

For example the initiatives to impose a ban on the imports of the products manufactured using or involving child labour. Other policies include the universalization of compulsory education combined with measures such as giving incentives to the parents who send their children to school and penalising those who do not. However, the effectiveness of these kinds of provisions depends on the improvement in other areas concerning children such as the quality of education, among others. There are many children in developing countries like Pakistan who do not fit in the binary categories of “child labour” vs. “benign or light” form of work which is considered acceptable and harmless. Children working on the streets can be considered to fall in the grey area between these two extremes because of the informal nature of their work which neither qualifies the criteria of “child labour” nor can the possibility of harm associated with their work be ruled out. The institutionalisation of children’s work in the form of child labour often fails to capture activities carried out in informal sector, mostly on the streets. In 2005, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) estimated that the number of “street children” ranges between 1.2 to 1.5 million in Pakistan ("The children working the streets of Karachi," 2012).

About 85 million children are involved in work hazardous to their “health, safety and moral development”

6

It should also be noted that children’s work is intermittent; they may switch between various kinds of works; and impacts of work on children’s well-being including health and education are not fixed. For example children may work in order to sponsor their or their siblings’ education, learn socialization skills, skip the school because of poor quality of education, or simply due to lack of interest in education provided in class rooms, non-availability of schools in the neighbourhood, lack of social security, or assistance of parent within or outside household. It can be argued that legal provisions that narrowly aim to minimize the number of “child labor” fail to take into account the variety of factors due to which children work in both formal and informal sectors (with or without their consent). Poor people including poor children are particularly vulnerable to deteriorating economic conditions including inflation, income uncertainties, unemployment, and low paying jobs (UNICEF, 2012). Therefore, a contextual understanding informed by social, economic and political circumstances experienced by working children is imperative to ensure their protection and well-being. For example, establishing a right that children not to be subjected to “hazardous” work does not correspond with a right to ensure that that their welfare is provided for.

Therefore, the important question is how to improve children’s well-being and provide an environment which is benevolent for the protection of their rights while ensuring their immediate survival is also protected. References - Child labour and responses, overview

note - Pakistan. International Labour Organization

- The children working the streets of Karachi. (2012). Retrieved 21/07, 2014, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-17690085

- Grootaert, C., & Kanbur, R. (1995). Child labour: an economic perspective. Int'l Lab. Rev., 134, 187.

- Making progress against child labour: Global estimates and trends 2000-2012. (2013). In I. L. O. Governance and Tripartism Department, International Program on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) (Ed.). Geneva.

- Sedletzki, V. (2012). Child rights and child wellbeing: a think piece Florence: United Nations Children Funds.

- Ten million engaged in child labour in Pakistan. (2010). Retrieved 10/08, 2014, from http://tribune.com.pk/story/75061/ten-million-engaged-in-child-labour-in-pakistan/

- UNICEF. (2012). Children in an urban world. New York: United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

A contextual understanding informed by social, economic and political circumstances experienced by working children is imperative to ensure their protection and well-being

FEATURE ONE

7

Since the end of the Cold War, the United Nations Security Council has articulated its responses to many crises of international peace and security through the use of sanctions. The Council currently manages 13 sanctions regimes; each specifically coded to apply pressure to decision-makers, in order to obtain compliance with some demand of the Council. Yet, in spite of their simple logic, sanctions simply do not guarantee total, immediate or even partial compliance. But is compliance the overarching objective of a sanctions regime? It could be argued that sanctions are a key element of the ‘do something’ strategy of international crisis management. The imposition of a sanction signals to countries that something is being done. It can also be argued that sanctions attach a stigma to the sanctioned actor and, in so doing, subtly changing a country’s internal dynamics or altering the balance of on-going negotiations. These justifications aside, the simple truth remains: sanctions regimes do not really work, or at least, not very well.

There are generally two reasons why this is the case. Firstly, often sanctions are not a viable option, due to the characteristics of the situation or the attitudes of the sanctioned actors. Secondly, the sanctions themselves are not properly enforced. Viability – Is this going to work? As mentioned above, sanctions are quite often used as a substitute for substantive action. In simple terms, they fulfil an alibi function. The Council’s invocation of sanctions reflects a lack of imagination and a lack of wisdom. Past practice indicates that the Security Council (and sanctions committees) gives little thought to the viability of sanctions before they are implemented. The Council should be asking a few simple questions prior to imposition. - Is the application of sanctions likely to

markedly change the political calculations of the proposed sanctions target?

- Is the proposed sanctions target likely to be susceptible to the pressure of sanctions? If yes, what kind of pressure is likely to have the greatest affect?

Peter Nadin is an independent researcher based in Sydney, Australia. He has worked previously as a project associate at the United Nations University, and interned with the UNU Institute for Sustainability and Peace and the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. Peter holds a Bachelor of Social Science/Arts (Hons) and a PhD from the University of Western Sydney.

For further enquiries please contact Peter: petenadin@gmail.com

DR PETER NADIN

Sanctions: And Why They Don’t Work (Very Well)

FEATURE TWO

8

EARLY CAREER RESEARCHER

FEATURE TWO

- Are the sanctions likely to be stringently enforced? Do neighbouring/key countries possess both will and the means to enforce the proposed sanctions?

In order to determine the susceptibility of a proposed sanctions target to sanctions pressure the Council needs to understand each of the target’s motivations, strength, modus operandi, leadership and alliances/relationships. Enforcement If the Council decides to impose sanctions, it must be prepared to meet the ‘enforcement threshold’ — that being the minimum requirement by which the effectiveness of the sanctions regime is denoted. If a sanctions regime has too many leaks, then it is not worth the time or the effort. When member-states invest will and capacity in enforcing a regime, the outcomes in terms of effectiveness are obviously going to be higher. The Multinational Interception Force (MIF) for Iraq and the NATO Operation Unified Protector for Libya (2011) were examples of naval interdiction taskforces whose objectives were the enforcement and monitoring of sanctions imposed on those countries. Whether or not these taskforces were effective is a matter for debate. In the case of Libya, NATO overlooked the flow of small arms and light weapons into other countries across the Sahel.

It is now almost certain that easily transferable weapons from Libya made their way down into Mali and were used by rebels in the Azawad (an area of northern Mali) to challenge the government. Yet enforcement — in the form of interdiction taskforces, whether naval or customs — requires the allocation of significant resources, which results only from the requisite outlay of political will. In most sanctions cases, particularly in Africa, enforcement is weak/fails due to the lack of precisely such will/resources. Sanctions regimes are rarely furnished with an independent ‘on-the-ground’ enforcement mechanism. In these cases, individual member-states are burdened by the responsibility for enforcement. More alarmingly, peacekeepers have also been burdened with this responsibility — a task for which they are neither trained nor in a position to adequately undertake. The problems of porous borders and the inadequate customs regimes in many countries continue to act as capacity constraints for sanctions regimes. This problem coupled with inadequate international regulation and national legislation for sanctions violations also presents as a challenge to effective sanctions enforcement.

The Council needs to understand each of the target’s motivations, strength, modus operandi, leadership and alliances/relationships.

9

The lack of control over airspace, the lack of standardized end user certificates (used in international transfers of weapons and ammunition to certify that the buyer is the final recipient of the materials) and the need for the criminalization of sanctions violations are representative of only a few of the regulatory puzzles. The case of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea The case of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) highlights the many weakness of sanctions, as described above. Following the first nuclear test by North Korea in 2006, the Council adopted resolution 1718 establishing a commercial and economic sanctions regime coupled with a de facto arms and ‘technologies of proliferation’ embargo. The resolution spelt out the Council’s displeasure — decrying the nuclear test and demanding that no further tests (nuclear or ballistic missile) be conducted. Prior to the test the Council issued a presidential statement (S/PRST/2006/41) urging North Korea to reconsider the nuclear test — a call that the North Koreans evidently ignored. The North Korea Permanent Representative, Pak Gil Yon, walked out of the UN after stating that the resolution was “unjustifiable”.

In foreign trade terms, the sanctions have had negligible impact. Marcus Noland has stated that “the imposition of these sanctions (resolution 1718) has had no perceptible effect on North Korea’s trade with the country’s two largest trading partners, China and South Korea”. Overall, the 1718 sanctions regime has failed in the accomplishment of its substantive goal — the de-nuclearisation of North Korea — and it is debatable whether any remarkable change in the negotiating dynamics has been achieved by the imposition and continuance of the sanctions regime. Yet, in spite of the measures imposed under both resolutions 1718 and 1874, North Korea has been able to attain highly sophisticated nuclear technology including for the enrichment of uranium. A recent report by a UN expert panel suggested that North Korea continues to employ a range of elaborate sanctions circumvention techniques. In the face such clever methods for circumvention, the 1718 sanction regime is tenuous at best. Making a difference It is clear from the history of UN sanctions regimes that few have actually made a difference to international peace and security.

The case of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea highlights the many weakness of sanctions

FEATURE TWO

10

FEATURE TWO

Diplomats must ask the question: are sanctions, in this case, actually going to make a difference?

11

Still, Robert Fowler is one UN Permanent Representative who might be able to claim at least a small victory on this front. Fowler as chairman of the Angolan Sanctions Committee attacked the problem of sanctions violations with thoughtfulness. He improved the sanctions regime by identifying the arms-diamonds schemes (the target of the sanctions) of UNITA (the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola, a former liberation movement, now a political party). Fowler published a report to this effect in 2000 and named and shamed those involved in supporting UNITA, including arms dealers Joe and Ronnie De Decker and the serving presidents of Togo and Burkina Faso Gnassingbé Eyadéma and Blaise Compaoré. Fowler’s kind of thoughtfulness, however, is seldom available in the hyperactive chamber of the Security Council. In the world of international diplomacy few have the time to think prior to acting. In moments of crisis, the option of sanctions is an easy choice to make — they send the ‘right message’ and they are cheap. Unfortunately, they are all too often ill conceived and poorly implemented. In light of the current argument, the Security Council should consider its options a little more carefully and, when considering the question of sanctions, diplomats must ask the question: are sanctions, in this case, actually going to make a difference?

This article was originally published on ourworld.unu.edu

The Kellogg-Briand Pact, otherwise known as the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War, or simply the Pact of Paris, is one of the most interesting of all modern treaties. This was a treaty signed in 1928 by most of the nations of the world, and by which the signatory nations pledged to renounce war as an official instrument of national policy and to use peaceful means to resolve disputes. One of the interesting facts about this Treaty is that it is still current. There are a number of reasons why I would suggest it is now appropriate to reclaim this Treaty in the popular imagination. The first reason is that the Treaty coincides with other international commitments. For instance, the 1999 United Nations Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, commits the signatories to promoting non-violence and a culture of non-violence. The Preamble to the UN Charter indicates that the basis for the organization is to prevent succeeding generations from experiencing the “scourge of war”, and the constitutional mandate for UNESCO commits that organization to encouraging a culture of peace.

The value of the Kellogg-Briand Pact is that this commitment to peace is made a little more concrete and a little more explicit. The second reason is that the Kellogg-Briand Pact is more relevant than ever, given current international politics. It is arguable that we live in a world where there has been a relative absence of inter-state armed conflict in recent years. However the paradox is that the potential for inter-state violence is more apparent than ever, with growing major power rivalries now evident in the Western Pacific and in Eastern Europe. It is instructive to remember that in 1914 the world had experienced a time of relative peace, but that peace soon came to an end. I contend the ideals of the Kellogg-Briand Pact are now more important than ever. The third reason is that aspirational goals are important. Goethe once wrote that the potential we identify is the potential we will tend to fulfil. It is true that the Kellogg-Briand Pact did not stop fascist aggression in the 1930s, leading to global war.

Dr James Page is Adjunct Associate Professor in the School of Humanities at the University of New England, and a recognized authority in the field of peace education. Recently he has served as the Australian co-ordinator for an internal research project, co-ordinated through Boston University, examining social attitudes to peace and war. For further enquiries please contact James: jamessmithpage@hotmail.com

DR JAMES PAGE

Reclaiming the Kellogg-Briand Pact

FEATURE THREE

12

ESTABLISHED SCHOLAR

FEATURE THREE

Yet I would suggest that this only underscores the importance of educating and publicizing why such a Pact is important, that is, why it is important for nations to renounce war as an official instrument of policy, and why it is important for nations to commit to pacific and diplomatic means for the resolving of disputes. Ideals are worth working on. The fourth reason is practical. The Kellogg-Briand Pact is often criticized as being overly idealist, and yet it was on the basis of the Pact that the Nuremburg Tribunal and the Tokyo Trials prosecuted those who had led the world into yet another world war. It is timely to remind ourselves that using war as an instrument of national policy is contrary to international law, and that those who do so are war criminals. Many would argue that there are many such contemporary war criminals yet to be prosecuted, although this in itself is yet another reason why the Kellogg-Briand Pact needs to be publicized. The final reason is cultural. We live in strange times, with a wide recognition of the destructiveness and futility of war, and yet we witness a popular culture which increasingly celebrates participation in violent conflict as the defining mark of courage and identity.

Any statement which explicitly rejects the value of war, and in particular which rejects war as an instrument of national policy, is useful in these circumstances. Such statements help undergird a rejection of the culture of violence, which is so pervasive. The Kellogg-Briand Pact is one such public statement. How do we go about re-claiming the Kellogg-Briand Pact within the popular imagination, or, to put the question another way, how do we obey the law against war? I would suggest what needs to happen is that national and international leaders of opinion ought to be encouraged to speak out on the importance of the Kellogg-Briand Pact and its relevance today. For the United Nations, one practical innovation would be the establishment of an International Day for the Renunciation of War, as a means for raising consciousness. Whatever the means, it is difficult to gainsay the relevance of the Pact, and the need for this to be reclaimed as a pressing one for our times.

This article was originally published in the e-journal Online Opinion

The ideals of the Kellogg-Briand Pact are now more important than ever

13

Call for Papers

UNAA Academic Network Newsletters If you’re an emerging scholar or seeking an outlet to float a research project, why not contribute to the UNAA Academic Network’s Newsletter? The monthly publication is now taking submissions! For more information contact academicnetwork@unaa.org.au

Eighth Global Studies Conference – ‘Power and Participation in the Age of Big Data’ Imperial College London, United Kingdom Key Themes: Economy and Trade, Politics, Power and Institutions, Society and Culture, Resources and Environment and a special focus on Power and Participation in the Age of Big Data Proposal Deadline: 21 October 2014 Conference Dates: 20 – 21 July 2015 Location: London, United Kingdom http://onglobalization.com/the-conference/call-for-papers

Journal – The South African Journal of International Affairs Details: Peer-reviewed interdisciplinary forum on foreign policy pertaining to Africa Key Themes: Foreign Policy Deadline: Rolling basis http://www.saiia.org.za/opportunities/call-for-papers-the-south-african-journal-of-international-affairs

14

Barcelona Workshop on Global Governance Key Themes: The Public and the Private in Global Governance Deadline: 29 September 2014 Conference Dates: 15 – 16 January 2015 Location: Barcelona, Spain http://bcnwgg.net/call-for-papers/

Call for Papers

For Emerging Scholars: The Sydney Globalist Details: The Sydney Globalist is an international affairs magazine published bi-annually by students at the University of Sydney, Australia. Key Themes: Global affairs, crises, especially issues surrounding conflict zones, environmental disasters and displaced populations. 1000 – 3000 words Deadline: Print Edition: 24 September 2014, calls will then reopen for next round; Online Edition: Rolling admissions http://thesydneyglobalist.org/2014/09/extended-deadline-print-magazine-call-for-submissions-crises-issue-ii-volume-x/

International Conference on Disasters in Asia Key Themes: Politics and disaster, economics and disaster, sociocultural dimensions of disaster, international agencies and disaster Deadline: 30 October 2014 Conference Dates: 20 – 21 January 2015 Location: Bohol, Philippines http://ac.upd.edu.ph/index.php/resources/news-announcements/479-call-for-papers-international-disasters-in-asia-conference

15

Book Workshop – Global Governance One Earth Foundation and the editors of Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organisations Key themes: The Role of Southern Regions in Norm Creation and Contestation: The African Context. Deadline: 15 January 2015 http://acuns.org/call-for-proposals-the-role-of-southern-regions-in-norm-creation-and-contestation-the-african-context/

New Political Science: A Journal of Politics & Culture Special Issue Theme: Intersectionality for the Global Age Deadline: 1 January 2015 http://explore.tandfonline.com/cfp/pgas/cnps-call-for-papers

Opportunities & Announcements

16

For Emerging Scholars: AIIA National Conference Masterclasses Details: Masterclasses for future leaders in international affairs, including students and young professional. Masterclass Topics: Academic, aid and development, defence and security, media, diplomacy, international law and human rights. Deadline: 9 October 2014 Masterclass Date: 26 October 2014 http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/events/2014-national-conference-masterclasses/

Stanford Australia Scholarship Foundation 2015 Australian Scholarship Foundation Details: The 2015 Stanford Australia Foundation Scholarship includes up to $15,000 (for course fees and economy travel) for a NFP executive to attend a Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) executive course of the recipient's choice. For a complete list of courses available visit the Stanford GSB website or for the Executive Program for Non Profit Leaders, please click here. http://www.stanford.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=146&Itemid=76

Sydney Leadership Program (2015) – Scholarship Details: Social Leadership Australia is offering $80,000 worth of scholarships for not-for-profit and community sector leaders to participate in the 2015 Sydney Leadership Program. Applications close: 7 October 2014 (Deadline has been extended) Note: There are two types of Sydney Leadership Scholarships available per program group: Full Scholarship of $15,000 plus GST – 2x per program + $500 personal contribution Partial Scholarship of $5,000 plus GST – 10x per program + $500 personal contribution Each scholarship has its own individual eligibility criteria and students should contact SLA to find out specific criteria before making an application. http://leadership.benevolent.org.au/programs/sydney/sydney-leadership-scholarships

The G20 and Australia’s Role in International Economic Governance – The Hon. Wayne Swan Lowy Institute for International Policy 15 October 2014, Lowy Institute for International Policy, 31 Bligh Street, Sydney http://www.lowyinstitute.org/events/event-hon-wayne-swan-mp

Public Lectures & Conferences

The Challenge Posed to Global Stability by the Islamic State Movement AIIA Victoria Branch 30 September 2014, Dyason House, 124 Jolimont Road, East Melbourne http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/events/the-islamic-state-in-iraq/

The Challenge of Getting Action on Human Rights Abuses in North Korea – The Hon Michael Kirby AC CMG University of Tasmania 9 October 2014, Stanley Burbury Theatre, University Centre, Sandy Bay campus http://www.events.utas.edu.au/2014/october/2014-sir-james-plimsoll-lecture

What to Expect from the Brisbane G20 Summit AIIA, Lowy Institute for International Policy, University of Queensland 29 October 2014, Parnell Building (Rm 222) UQ St Lucia Campus, University of Queensland http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/events/what-to-expect-from-the-brisbane-g20-summit/

17

Australian Institute of International Affairs 2014 National Conference 27 October 2014, Hyatt Hotel, Canberra http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/events/aiia-national-conference-2014/

Upcoming UNAA Events

18

Sustainability Leadership Series – Impact Investment: Revolutionising Capital Markets for Greater Social Gains UNAA Victoria Division 9 October 2014, Hosted by National Australia Bank, The Academy (The Bowl Room), 500 Bourke Street, Melbourne http://www.unaa.org.au/impact-investing-seminar.html

2014 Media Awards Presentation Dinner UNAA Victoria Division 24 October 2014, Hilton on the Park, Melbourne http://www.unaavictoria.org.au/events/save-the-date-media-awards-2014-presentation-dinner/

UN Day Cenotaph Ceremony and Parliament House Lunch UNAA New South Wales Division 24 October 2014, Details Coming Soon to the UNAA NSW website http://www.unaa.org.au/nsw-upcoming-events/

Publications

The Right to Water and Sanitation: A Handbook Report of the UN Special Rapporteur for the human right to Water and Sanitation http://www.righttowater.info/handbook/#1 Special Rapporteur on the human rights to water and sanitation, Catarina de Albuquerque, has released the culmination of six years work in the form of The Right to Water Handbook. The Handbook ‘explains the meaning and legal obligations that arise from these rights, translating the often complex technical and legal language into accessible information.

The UN Human Rights Council: A Critique and Early Assessment Rosa Freedman; Routledge Research in Human Rights Law http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415640329/ This book examines the creation and formative years of the United Nations Human Rights Council and assesses the extent to which the Council has fulfilled its mandate. International law and theories of international relations are used to examine the council and its functions. Council sessions, procedures and mechanisms are analysed in-depth, with particular consideration given to whether the Council has become politicised to the same extent as its predecessor, the Commission. Whilst remaining aware of the key differences in their functions Rosa Freedman compares the work of the Council to that of treaty-based human rights bodies. The author draws on observations from her attendance at Council proceedings in order to offer a unique account of how the body works in practice. (Taken from Publisher’s Description)

19

The handbook is presented over nine booklets covering: frameworks, financing, services, monitoring, justice, principles, checklists, as well as sources.

Publications

Trade, Food Security, and Human Rights Ying Chen; Ashgate Publishing http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781472437440 Most scholars attribute systemic causes of food insecurity to poverty, human overpopulation, lack of farmland, and expansion of biofuel programs. However, as Chen argues here, another significant factor has been overlooked. The current food insecurity is not about food shortage, the problem is how to secure access to resources. Examining EU and US agricultural policies and World Trade Organization negotiations in agriculture, the author argues how they affect the international agricultural trade, claiming that current food insecurity is the result of inequitable food distribution and trade practices. (Taken from Publisher’s Description)

The Best of What’s Around

UN Library Research Guide: Climate Change http://research.un.org/en/climate-change The Dag Hammarskjöld Library has put together a research guide on the issue of Climate Change. The Guide includes a backgrounder on climate change; climate change at the United Nations; major reports; books and journals. The Guide also incorporates the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s Newsroom, allowing all interested to keep up to date on all issues climate change related. Over the coming months the Newsletter will explore further research guides available from the library to draw your attention to them.

20

The Best of What’s Around

Media Friendly Glossary on Migration http://www.panoseurope.org/sites/default/files/production_files/UNAOC-Panos-Europe-Institute_Media-Friendly-Glossary-on-Migration.pdf The Panos Institute in Marseilles, together with the UN Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) in New York, have recognised the level of difficult in making sense of terminology utilised by those in the field of migration. In an effort to assist, they consulted a wide range of agencies involved with Migration and produced this “Media-Friendly Glossary on Migration”. The Publication was supported by the Open Society Foundations and presented on the 29th of August 2014 to the 6th Global Forum of UNAOC. The glossary will be helpful to all with an interest in the topic, and probably to everyone else as well, as it contains many elusive terms, some relevant to work well beyond Migration.

HeForShe http://heforshe.org On September 20th UN Women Global Goodwill Ambassador Emma Watson delivered a moving address at UN Headquarter in New York. (If you are yet to see the footage of the address it is available here - http://youtu.be/Q0Dg226G2Z8) The speech was to mark the commencement of the HeForShe Solidarity Movement for Gender Equality. HeForShe ‘brings together one half of humanity in support of the other half of humanity for the benefit of all’.

21

The campaign asks for a commitment from men in recognising that ‘gender equality is not only a women’s issue, it is a human rights issue’ and to take action against all forms of violence and discrimination faced by women and girls.