The Ethio-Eritrea Claims Commission on Use of Force: Issue of Self-Defense or Violation of Sovereignty

A decision that deals with international disputes, be it arbitral or judicial, has to properly reflect objectivity and coherence with existing rules of international law. This paper shows the decision of the Ethio-Eritrea Claims Commission on the jus ad bellum case is bereft of objectivity and coherence, which contributed a disservice to international law on many aspects. The Commission’s decision that holds Eritrea in contravention to Art 2(4) of the UN Charter based on Ethiopia’s contention is flawed. It fails to consider: the illegitimacy of an actual authority established over contested territory through hostile acts, the proper determination of effectivites under international law, the sanctity of colonially determined boundaries, Ethiopia’s prior firm political recognition and undergirds to respect colonial boundary, and Ethio-Eritrea Border Commission’s decision. The paper will also argue that the Commission confused Eritrea’s right of self-defense with the rule against the non-use of force to settle territorial disputes; wherefore its decision sanitizes or sterilizes unlawful change of territory resulted through unlawful use of force to the effect of advantaging aggressions. The paper likewise argues that the decision is so sacrilegious that it disregards the ossified legal finality of colonial boundaries. Moreover, its approach toward armed attack does not reflect the peculiarity of the jus ad bellum case rather it brings about definitional uncertainties and sustains the perception that the law on self-defense is unsettled.

Extremism among College and High School Students in Moscow: Diagnostics Features

In this day and age, extremism in various forms of its manifestation is a real threat to the world community, the national security of a state and its territorial integrity, as well as to the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens. Extremism, as it is known, in general terms described as a commitment to extreme views and actions, radically denying the existing social norms and rules. Supporters of extremism in the ideological and political struggles often adopt methods and means of psychological warfare, appeal not to reason and logical arguments, but to emotions and instincts of the people, to prejudices, biases, and a variety of mythological designs. They are dissatisfied with the established order and aim at increasing this dissatisfaction among the masses. Youth extremism holds a specific place among the existing forms and types of extremism. In this context in 2015, we conducted a survey among Moscow college and high school students. The aim of this study was to determine how great or small is the difference in understanding and attitudes towards extremism manifestations, inclination and readiness to take part in extremist activities and what causes this predisposition, if it exists. We performed multivariate analysis and found the Russian college and high school students' opinion about the extremism and terrorism situation in our country and also their cognition on these topics. Among other things, we showed, that the level of aggressiveness of young people were not above the average for the whole population. The survey was conducted using the questionnaire method. The sample included college and high school students in Moscow (642 and 382, respectively) by method of random selection. The questionnaire was developed by specialists of RUDN University Sociological Laboratory and included both original questions (projective questions, the technique of incomplete sentences), and the standard test Dayhoff S. to determine the level of internal aggressiveness. It is also used as an experiment, the technique of study option using of FACS and SPAFF to determine the psychotypes and determination of non-verbal manifestations of emotions. The study confirmed the hypothesis that in respondents’ opinion, the level of aggression is higher today than a few years ago. Differences were found in the understanding of and respect for such social phenomena as extremism, terrorism, and their danger and appeal for the two age groups of young people. Theory of psychotypes, SPAFF (specific affect cording system) and FACS (facial action cording system) are considered as additional techniques for the diagnosis of a tendency to extreme views. Thus, it is established that diagnostics of acceptance of extreme views among young people is possible thanks to simultaneous use of knowledge from the different fields of socio-humanistic sciences. The results of the research can be used in a comparative context with other countries and as a starting point for further research in the field, taking into account its extreme relevance.