Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
In the article the cases of three territorial disputes between the NATO member states were analyzed, these are: the dispute between Canada and Denmark over the Hans Island in the Kennedy Channel, the dispute between United States and Canada over the part of the Beaufort Sea and thecase of the Northwest Passage, which is considered by Canada as its internal waters while this position is rejected by United States and the other European NATO members. These disputes are in place for the following reasons: access to the potentially newly accessable sea routes and access to rich oil and gas fields. In the article the determinants of these disputes were analyzed as well as most important events that took place during the disputes. An attempt was also made to determine what is and what can be the future impact of global warming on the shape of these disputes.
PL
W niniejszym artykule przeanalizowane zostały trzy przypadki sporów terytorialnych pomiędzy państwami członkowskimi NATO: spór pomiędzy Kanadą i Danią o znajdującą się w Kanale Kennedy’ego Wyspą Hans, spór pomiędzy Stanami Zjednoczonymi i Kanadą o część Morza Beauforta oraz kwestia Przejęcia Północnozachodniego, które uznawane jest przez Kanadęza wewnętrzne wody terytorialne, czemu sprzeciwiają się Stany Zjednoczone oraz europejskie państwa członkowskie NATO. Spory te mają miejsce z następujących powodów: dostępu do nowych tras morskich oraz do bogatych złóż ropy i gazu. W artykule przeanalizowane zostały uwarunkowania zaistnienia tych sporów oraz przedstawione zostały najważniejsze wydarzenia z ich przebiegu. Została także podjęta próba określenia dotychczasowego oraz potencjalnego przyszłego wpływu globalnego ocieplenia na kształt tych sporów.
EN
Global Warming and the Kyoto Protocol are issues that raise many controversies. This matter is especially visible in the countries which formed the JUSCANNZ, later renamed the Umbrella Group, which is an alliance in the climate negotiations process that consists of non-European Union developed states that – above all – oppose new greenhouse gases emissions reductions commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol itself and the aforementioned commitments were and still are the sources of conflicts on the international and country levels. On the country level these conflicts are highly noticeable in four Umbrella Group countries: United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada and they occurred on various levels in regard to the Kyoto Protocol: negotiation (case of the United States), ratification (cases of the United States and Australia), implementation (cases of the Australia and New Zealand) and a level that can be called a “withdrawal” level (case of Canada). All these conflicts were caused by differences in main political parties’ positions towards the Kyoto Protocol and/or by differences in the look on that matter presented by the legislative branch and the executive branch. In this article the abovementioned issues will be examined.
PL
Artykuł nie zawiera abstraktu w języku polskim
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.