Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pada tahun 2011, terjadi krisis kemanusiaan di Libya yang menyebabkan munculnya korban jiwa di kalangan penduduk sipil. Menyikapi kondisi ini, North Atlatic Treaty Organizatoin (NATO) memutuskan untuk melakukan misi intervensi kemanusiaan ke Libya pada 31 Maret 2011. Dalam melakukan upaya tersebut, NATO meminta Jerman untuk turut mengirimkan pasukan militernya guna membantu misi kolektif NATO di Libya. Terlepas dari adanya permintaan tersebut, Jerman menunjukkan perilaku defection dengan memutuskan untuk tidak melibatkan pasukan militernya ke dalam misi tersebut. Perilaku defection Jerman dalam menyikapi permintaan NATO tersebut menarik dikaji, sebab fenomena tersebut menunjukkan bahwa institusi keamanan tidak memiliki pengaruh yang signifikan dalam membentuk perilaku anggotanya pada kondisi-kondisi tertentu. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan perilaku defection yang dilakukan Jerman terhadap permintaan NATO pada kasus Krisis Libya 2011 guna mengetahui kondisi-kondisi yang mempengaruhi peran institusi keamanan dalam membentuk perilaku anggotanya. Untuk menjelaskan hal tersebut, penelitian ini menggunakan teori aliansi yang dikemukakan oleh Glenn H. Snyder. Hasil analisis dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa perilaku defection yang ditunjukkan Jerman dalam menyikapi permintaan NATO pada kasus Krisis Libya 2011 dipengaruhi oleh dua alasan. Pertama, Jerman tidak memiliki kepentingan yang signifikan untuk menyelesaiakan permasalahan krisis yang terjadi di Libya pada tahun 2011. Kedua, Jerman memiliki ketakutan terhadap risiko entrapment dalam menyikapi Krisis Libya 2011. Oleh karena itu, perilaku defection dilakukan guna mengurangi risiko entrapment tersebut.

---

In February 2011, Libya underwent a civil war that led to civilian casualties. In response to this situation, North Atlatic Treaty Organizatoin (NATO) decided to send its troops to Libya to protect Libyan civilian. While doing so, NATO requested Germany to contribute its military troop to NATOs collective forces in Libya. In spite of this request , Germany decided to shows a sign of defection behaviour by rejecting to send its military troop to Libya. German defection behaviour towards NATOs expectation in the wake of Libyan Crisis 2011 is intriguing to be studied, because it shows that security alliance does not always have significant influence on shaping the behaviour of its members. Therefore, this study examines the cause of German defection behaviour towards NATOs request in the Libyan Crisis 2011.

To explain this phenomenon, this study uses alliance theory to understand why NATO had no significant influence on shaping German behaviour in such case. The result of this study indicates that German defection behaviour towards NATOs request was driven by two factors. First, Germany does not have any significant interest on solving the undergoing crisis in Libya 2011. Second, Germany had fears of entrapment due to several reasons including its low direct and indirect dependece toward NATO, explicitness of alliance agreement, and NATOs supportive behaviour toward Germany in the past.  This fears leads to German defection behaviour toward NATOs expectation in Libyan Crisis 2011."

"This book explains the rules for interpretation of treaties and gives examples of their application in national and international jurisdictions. The rules of treaty interpretation codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties now apply to virtually all treaties which may be encountered in an international context and also within national legal systems where treaties have an impact on a large and growing range of matters. The rules of treaty interpretation differ somewhat from typical rules for interpreting legal instruments and legislation within national legal systems. Lawyers, and also some administrators, diplomats, and officials at international organisations, are increasingly likely to encounter issues of treaty interpretation which require not only knowledge of the relevant rules of interpretation, but also how these rules have been, and are to be, applied in practice. Now that the codified rules of treaty interpretation have been in force for some twenty-five years, there is a considerable body of case law on their application. This case law, combined with the history and analysis of the rules of treaty interpretation, provides a basis for understanding this most important task in the application of treaties internationally and within national systems of law. Any lawyer who ever has to consider international matters, and increasingly any lawyer whose work involves domestic legislation with any international connection, is at risk nowadays of encountering a treaty provision which requires interpretation, whether the treaty provision is explicitly in issue or is the source of the relevant domestic legislation. This book provides a guide to interpreting treaties properly in accordance with the modern rules."