The main aim of this study is to investigate which structural ideas that lies behind the European Union?s marine operation Atalanta that has been put into motion to counteract piracy and robbery outside the coast of Somalia. In order to do this, we have with the use of the theory of weak states, intervention as well as Sovereignty, investigated EU?s document in the question with the use of the idea centered analytical method. The questions that has guided this study, lies both on an empirical and theoretical level.

AbstractAs human beings, we are all governed by our innate instinct that to kill another human being, or to just inflict pain on another, is to go against what makes us human. Still, it happens every day, far and near. Some of these killings happens in war-like situations, where atrocities against humanity occur. The international community has since the founding of UN in 1945, a duty to intervene where crimes against the human rights occur. This is a difficult task, because, in order to intervene and help those in need, the situation might postulate states violating states Sovereignty.

The purpose of this study is to analyze how the parties (USA, Great Britain, UN and the European Union) legitimize their intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina as seen from without the conceptions of Sovereignty and intervention. USA and the UN have legitimized their intervention on security reasons. The American president, George W. Bush, claimed that democracies never engage in war with each other and that democracies were prosperous just because they were democracies. According to the president, that is why it is important to democratise the whole Balkan region to protect the international community from terrorism which grows in unstable and undemocratic states.

The relationship between China and Japan has historically been problematic and, in some ways still is. One of the issues where both of the states cannot agree on is the island dispute. While both states are claiming Sovereignty over the island and there do not seem to be an ending to it in the near future. If the island dispute continues to escalate it could have a negative impact in the Asian region and eventually rest of the world as well. However due to the complexity of the dispute a deeper knowledge is needed and a mutual understanding is needed.

For one month during the beginning of 2011, the world followed the violent events in Libya. During this time the United Nations was faced with a complex question, could they handle the ongoing violence and find a solution to the killings or would the hostile situation go on. We now know what happened, but not why. It is this question that this essay aims to answer. This essay covers the discussion of Sovereignty on the one hand and humanitarian intervention on the other and responsibility to protect in between.

This study examines the theories about intervention and Sovereignty in relation to the world of today, with the raising question about humanitarian intervention in a globalized society.The purpose of this paper is to examine if intervention can be justified in a sovereign state and how it can be justified. The expected outcome is that conclusion can be drawn from the specific case with United Nations intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina, and what kind of motives they putted up to justify their intervention.Because we are still living in the era of the Westphalia system with the inherited thoughts of state Sovereignty, but in conflict with the new ideas of globalization and human rights, it?s of big relevance to look at this topic closer.First of all the reader is presented to the theoretical aspects of state, Sovereignty and different kinds of intervention, to become more aware of the complications surrounding the relationship between these conceptions.The method used in this study is a motive analysis with the focus on the motives told by United Nation, to be the reason for the intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina. The empirical results are based on the reports from United Nations Security Council during the years 1991 ? 1995.The results are that the intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina can be justified when looking at the theories in relation to the empirical result, with the FN ? charter and the fact of violation against humanitarian law and human rights.One conclusion can easily be drawn, that individual rights are playing a big role in today?s global society and are putting some pressure on the United Nation to look over the rules about humanitarian intervention..

Aim: The aim of this study is to analyse the possible motives behind the actions of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council in relation to the conflict in Syria. The background of this aim is the Arab Spring and the protests and violence that have followed the uprising. While, in Libya, the UN Security Council adopted resolutions that allowed sanctions against the Libyan government, no such resolutions have been adopted yet in Syria.Theory: The principal theory of the analysis is Stephen D. Krasner´s theory on Sovereignty.Method: I have researched various resolutions and statements done in the Security Council, together with official statements from the actors, through Hadenius´ motive analysis methodology and Gilje & Grimen and Ödmans theories on hermeneutics.Conclusion: The conclusion of the analysis is that there, in the case of Syria and Libya, are two different parties in the Security Council. One that stands for Sovereignty and one that stands for intervention.

One of the big challenges for the European Union today lies in finding a common foreign policy for its 27 sovereign member states with their divided interests, experiences and traditions. New objectives set requirements on the Union to develop and intensify its military ability. The European Union´s view on when military force can be utilized sets concepts like Sovereignty and intervention in focus. Can Sovereignty be limited and if so can an intervention be justified? How did the Union argue regarding its participation in the intervention in Afghanistan, 2001? The Just War Theory gives the essay a normative framework against which to assess the Union´s view and guidelines for the use of military capabilities.

Violence is put in a specific context when the police are the perpetrator of violence rendering violence possibly legitimate through Sovereignty. The possibility of legitimization of police violence raises important questions of how such violence is legitimized and how resistance is conceived of and defined. I have interviewed seven people in Sweden from different backgrounds, all of whom share the experience of having been subjugated to police violence, including threats, harassments and physical violence.This paper analyzes the performativity of police violence through the relations between police violence, power, Sovereignty, subjectstatus and resistance, in order to understand how police violence is being legitimized and to understand its consequenses with respect to those subjugated to it. I?ve also analyzed if this violence is being politicized and, in that case, how politicization is made possible.

Standing outside the EU and the EES, Switzerland is a unique state characterized by federalism, direct democracy and neutrality. Though always focused on preserving these features and its Sovereignty, Switzerland has managed to gain access to some sectors of the single market through bilateral agreements with the EU. The purpose of this thesis is to examine what level of integration Switzerland has reached in those bilaterally regulated sectors of the single market. As integration cannot easily be assessed, the extent of the Swiss adoption of the acquis is seen as an indicator of the level of integration and is thus examined. The conclusion is that Switzerland, mostly due to the economic interest of common rules, but partly due to pressure from the EU, almost completely adopts the acquis in the bilaterally regulated sectors, including the interpretation of the ECJ.

During 2008 we experienced an expansion of large scale investments in foreign farmland. This increasing trend has become a political hot-spot, but there is not much research available within the field. Due to a lack of research it remains a vital task to outline the potential effects of this trend. Drawing on existing ideas from some of the main actors within the field, The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), The World Bank, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the latest G8 summit on agriculture, four main purposes are set out for this paper. First, to outline some of the underlying mechanisms behind the trend is considered crucial for the understanding of the nature of these investments.

Violence is put in a specific context when the police are the perpetrator of violence rendering violence possibly legitimate through Sovereignty. The possibility of legitimization of police violence raises important questions of how such violence is legitimized and how resistance is conceived of and defined. I have interviewed seven people in Sweden from different backgrounds, all of whom share the experience of having been subjugated to police violence, including threats, harassments and physical violence.This paper analyzes the performativity of police violence through the relations between police violence, power, Sovereignty, subjectstatus and resistance, in order to understand how police violence is being legitimized and to understand its consequenses with respect to those subjugated to it. I?ve also analyzed if this violence is being politicized and, in that case, how politicization is made possible.

Violence is put in a specific context when the police are the perpetrator of violence rendering violence possibly legitimate through Sovereignty. The possibility of legitimization of police violence raises important questions of how such violence is legitimized and how resistance is conceived of and defined. I have interviewed seven people in Sweden from different backgrounds, all of whom share the experience of having been subjugated to police violence, including threats, harassments and physical violence.This paper analyzes the performativity of police violence through the relations between police violence, power, Sovereignty, subjectstatus and resistance, in order to understand how police violence is being legitimized and to understand its consequenses with respect to those subjugated to it. I?ve also analyzed if this violence is being politicized and, in that case, how politicization is made possible.

The relationship between China and Japan has historically been problematic and, in some ways still is. One of the issues where both of the states cannot agree on is the island dispute. While both states are claiming Sovereignty over the island and there do not seem to be an ending to it in the near future. If the island dispute continues to escalate it could have a negative impact in the Asian region and eventually rest of the world as well. However due to the complexity of the dispute a deeper knowledge is needed and a mutual understanding is needed.

Our aim with this paper is to study the debate concerning the refusal of entry of the two Egyptians and the involvement of USA, to see if the Swedish Sovereignty has been compromised. We have chosen two theories, realism and radicalism, to read if opinions can be identified of supporting one of them. The empiricism we selected are from debate articles in the big news papers Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet and Expressen. We also studied the debate in the Riksdag . The method we used was qualitative and is called analysis of content.The result we could conclude was that most of the debaters are disappointed with how the government handled the whole situation, but still believes that it made the decision on itself.