Samuel M. Makinda

The international solidarity principle is a crucial legal norm of international society. It helps guide state conduct and facilitate cooperation among international actors to respond to global challenges and uphold human rights. The European Union (EU) and its Member States have argued that their bilateral agreements with non-EU countries to prevent irregular migration to Europe is a demonstration of international solidarity that fulfils their obligations to asylum seekers and refugees. However, the EU’s interpretation of international solidarity in these arrangements has been contested. This article argues that the EU has strategically interpreted the international solidarity principle to fit in with, and complement, its migration deterrence policy framework. It posits that the EU’s interpretation abuses the international solidarity principle as it aims to separate the solidarity principle from the realisation of human rights, thereby hurting, instead of benefitting, asylum seekers and refugees. This article makes an important contribution to understanding how the solidarity principle is interpreted between EU and non-EU partners, and the intimate connection between solidarity and the realisation of human rights. More importantly, it demonstrates how the interpretation and evasion of the international solidarity principle has been shaped by, and shaped to fit, the EU’s migration externalisation policy framework.

This article argues that claims by some international relations (IR) critics that IR rejects ideas, concepts, and theories from Africa and the Global South are ahistorical, exaggerated, and amount to the de-legitimation of non-Western contributions to the discipline. Employing the concept of the social construction of knowledge and an internal discursive method, we suggest that while scholars from the Global North are numerically preponderant and have dominated IR for many years, those from the Global South, including Africans, have also made an impact on its growth. We argue that eclecticism, a key IR approach that focuses on problem-solving, has roots in both the South and North. Therefore, we claim that it is the failure of some scholars both in the North and South to appropriately acknowledge Global South contributions that have helped to enhance the perception of Western-centrism in IR. Accordingly, we conclude that there is a need for IR scholars to acknowledge that ideas and concepts from Africa and the non-Western world have been shared and utilized within the discipline.

When Australia reneged on a AUD$90 billion submarine contract with France in 2021 as it joined AUKUS, a new trilateral military partnership between Australia, the UK and the US, it was accused of lying and breaching France's trust. This perceived act of betrayal not only led to a deterioration in the diplomatic relationship between Australia and France, but it also drew attention to the consequences of violating the norm of pacta sunt servanda-agreements must be kept. Although it is recognized that breaches of trust undermine relationships, what has been underexplored is how a violation of norms can also undermine the presumption of trust in international society more broadly. Focusing on how Australia broke its contract with France after it joined AUKUS, this article argues that Australia's conduct not only harmed its relationship with France, but it also led the European Union (EU) to raise questions about how much to trust AUKUS partners as it engages in the Indo-Pacific region. It posits that adherence to international norms is important for developing trust between states in international society and has the potential to facilitate cooperation and enhance security in the complex Indo-Pacific region and beyond.
When Australia breached its submarine contract with France in 2021 as it joined AUKUS, diplomatic relations quickly deteriorated. This article shows that the impact of this perceived act of betrayal went beyond bilateral relations to undermine trust in international society more broadly.

Global Perspectives in Policing and Law Enforcement provides an exposition of policing and law enforcement practices, challenges, and opportunities in twenty different countries that were carefully selected to represent diverse geographic regions of the world. Each chapter presents policing from a different cultural background with diverse historical law enforcement experiences, varied social and demographic characteristics, and wide-ranging approaches to political leadership. By examining critical data and highlighting cracks within law enforcement across multiple countries, the contributors to this volume have created a framework of policing as it transitions into a modern outfit. Divided into parts, the book focuses on a large sample of countries from Africa, Europe, Asia, and Latin and Central America, North America and the Caribbean, as well as Australia and New Zealand. Such a broad coverage makes this book a critical reference point for those interested in criminal justice, criminology, political science, anthropology, and many others.

People from all walks of life often discuss or seek meanings of global phenomena such as security, sovereignty and globalization. While some contest their meanings, others take them for granted and never ask how they came about. This article examines how global phenomena acquire their meanings. My argument is based on three assumptions. The first is that people and other purposive agents have a need to understand global phenomena, while the second is that there is an interpretive community, which seeks to satisfy this need. The third assumption is that the global interpretive community often reflects the perspectives of hegemonic actors…