Приказ основних података о документу
Neutralnost u XXI veku - anahron ili savremen koncept?
La notion de neutralité au XXI siècle: Anachronisme ou actualité
dc.creator | Jovanović, Miloš | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-11T15:08:03Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-03-11T15:08:03Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0550-2179 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1149 | |
dc.description.abstract | Neutralnost se neretko smatra zastarelim konceptom koji više nije u skladu sa realnostima međunarodnog prava i međunarodnih odnosa. Činjenica je međutim da danas, ne samo da postoje države koje se i dalje deklarišu kao neutralne i vode politiku neutralnosti, već su se pojavile i nove države koje su tek u poslehladnoratovskom periodu proglasile neutralnost. Ovakva otpornost koncepta neutralnosti proizlazi iz činjenice da je, suprotno ideološkom i idealističkom viđenju međunarodne politike koje je preovladavalo u prvim poslehladnoratovskim godinama, anarhija - u smislu odsustva centralne vlasti koja bi se nalazila iznad država koje odlikuje suverena jednakost - i dalje glavna karakteristika međunarodnih odnosa. U kontekstu takvog decentralizovanog međunarodnopravnog poretka, u okviru kog nije moguće efektivno ograničiti upotrebu sile kroz mehanizme kolektivne bezbednosti, koncept neutralnosti, shvaćen prevashodno kao politička odluka i volja a manje kao institut međunarodnog prava, može predstavljati značajan instrument za vođenje spoljne politike i čuvanje unutrašnjeg mira. | sr |
dc.description.abstract | La neutralité est souvent considérée comme étant une notion obsolète qui ne correspond plus à l 'état du droit international ni à celui des relations internationales. Pourtant, non seulement certains pays se prévalent aujourd 'hui encore de la neutralité, mais de nouveaux Etats ont proclamé leur propre neutralité depuis la fin de la guerre froide. Cette résilience du concept de neutralité s 'explique avant tout par le fait que - contrairement au discours dominant sur la politique internationale selon lequel les relations entre Etats souverains seraient désormais strictement encadrées par le droit international, et notamment dans le domaine de la paix et de la sécurité internationales - 1'anarchie constitue toujours le trait dominant et central des relations internationales. Ses implications se font au demeurant sentir sur les mécanismes de sécurité collective qui ne se sont jamais montrés réellement efficaces dans l 'interdiction du recours à la force par les Etats, y compris dans le cadre des Nations Unies. Dans un tel contexte, le recours à la neutralité, laquelle doit être davantage considérée comme étant d 'essence politique et non en tant qu 'institution juridique, peut indéniablement servir dans le monde actuel d 'instrumentpertinent dans la conduite de la politique étrangère ainsi que dans la préservation de la paix. | FRA |
dc.description.abstract | Neutrality is generally considered as an outdated feature of international law and international relations. Most often seen as an anachronism, which is not in accordance with contemporary public international law, it is believed to be condemned. Still, some small states currently continue to consider themselves as neutral states in the international arena. Moreover, since the end of the Cold War, we have witnessed new countries embracing neutrality. The explanation of such an endurance of the concept, along with practice of neutrality, resides in the fact that the perception of neutrality as a foremost legal tool is essentially erroneous. More than being a legal instrument, neutrality is above all a political category which is in total accordance with the international anarchy that still forms the reality of international relations and that gave neutrality its birth. In such a context, neutrality can constitute a powerful tool in the international arena but its existence, its effectiveness, its disappearance all depends upon politics, not to say power politics. The legal guarantees it bears can fundamentally only be assured in the case of a favorable geopolitical environment and balance of power as well as sufficient deterrence provide by the neutral state. This is the reason why neutrality is considered to be effective only in the case of armed neutrality as it is shown by the Swiss example. | en |
dc.publisher | Univerzitet u Novom Sadu - Pravni fakultet, Novi Sad | |
dc.relation | Projekat Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu: Identitetski preobražaj Srbije | |
dc.rights | openAccess | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | |
dc.source | Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad | |
dc.subject | neutralnost | sr |
dc.subject | međunarodna anarhija | sr |
dc.subject | kolektivna bezbednost | sr |
dc.subject | klasično međunarodno pravo | sr |
dc.subject | doktrina pravednog rata | sr |
dc.subject | sécurité collective | FRA |
dc.subject | neutralité | FRA |
dc.subject | état d'anarchie | FRA |
dc.subject | droit international classique | FRA |
dc.subject | doctrine de la guerre juste | FRA |
dc.subject | neutrality | en |
dc.subject | just war theory | en |
dc.subject | international anarchy | en |
dc.subject | collective security | en |
dc.subject | classic international law | en |
dc.title | Neutralnost u XXI veku - anahron ili savremen koncept? | sr |
dc.title | La notion de neutralité au XXI siècle: Anachronisme ou actualité | fr |
dc.title | Neutrality in the 21st century: An anachronistic or a contemporary concept? | en |
dc.type | article | |
dc.rights.license | BY | |
dc.citation.epage | 1232 | |
dc.citation.issue | 4 | |
dc.citation.other | 53(4): 1207-1232 | |
dc.citation.rank | M24 | |
dc.citation.spage | 1207 | |
dc.citation.volume | 53 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.5937/zrpfns52-24811 | |
dc.identifier.fulltext | https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/125/1146.pdf | |
dc.identifier.rcub | conv_2589 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion |