Ulrich Haase Nielsen | Aalborg University (original) (raw)

Uploads

Papers by Ulrich Haase Nielsen

The following paper examines how the European Central Bank (ECB) has responded to the challenges ... more The following paper examines how the European Central Bank (ECB) has responded to the challenges of the financial and sovereign debt crisis within the EMU. First theory is introduced to get an understanding of the problems that the ECB faces. The theory regards central banking, optimum currency areas, and the monetary transmission mechanism. The theory is followed by an explanation of the crisis that struck the Eurozone in 2008, which revealed macroeconomic imbalances in the Eurozone. This leads to the analysis, which mainly focuses on analysing how the ECB has attempted to re-establish the singles of its monetary policy transmission through non-standard measures. In the light of the macroeconomic imbalances and the non-standard measures introduced by the ECB, two alternative solutions beyond the potential of the ECB are suggested.

The following paper examines how ‘financialization’ has evolved in the Eurozone. The first part i... more The following paper examines how ‘financialization’ has evolved in the Eurozone. The first part is a literature review, which defines and operationalizes the concept. It is followed by a comparative analysis with the US establishing that financialisation has occurred in the Eurozone, in a different fashion on some indicators. We then analyse the impact in the Eurozone following the crisis. This section determines that financialization has had consequences in terms of decreasing demand and increasing access to finance problems. The last chapter assesses the policy response in comparison to the US crisis. We find that the Eurozone has underperformed because of an insufficient regulatory framework. It is further discussed how Quantitative Easing, as used by the Fed in the US could be used in the Eurozone.

There has long been disagreement in the international society about humanitarian interventions an... more There has long been disagreement in the international society about humanitarian interventions and, in fact, the subject truly divides the English School into pluralism and solidarism. The dilemmas are many, but the weighting and ranking of state sovereignty versus human rights is absolutely essential. On the one hand, states or others are not allowed to interfere in the internal affairs of other states, because of the norm of sovereignty. But on the other hand, we are not prepared to just observe a population being exposed to a massacre. This dilemma made the former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan ask what we, as an international community, should do. The answer to this came in 2001 with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). It was still the states’ responsibility to secure the population's safety, but if it failed to do so, the responsibility passed on to the international community. R2P was later adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2005 and endorsed by the UN Security Council in 2006; it was used for the first time in the intervention in Libya in 2011.
The spring of 2011 was marked by citizens of several Arab states rebelling against their government and was later popularly called the Arab Spring. Libya was at that time the third country, after Tunisia and Egypt, where people rebelled against their regime. Peaceful demonstrations broke out and Moammar Mohammed Abu Minyar al-Qadhafi (Gaddafi) responded with fierce brutality. This made the UN Security Council react and the first response was a peaceful approach through Resolution 1970. Since these did not stop the violence from Gaddafi, Resolution 1973 was later adopted. This resolution mandated the use of all necessary means to protect the civilians, which ultimately resulted in humanitarian intervention. Around eight months after the first demonstrations in February 2011, Gaddafi was captured in October 2011 and subsequently executed. Based on the humanitarian intervention in Libya, it is interesting to examine how it was made legal, but also, and possibly even more interesting, to what extent this intervention was legitimate. As regards legality, it is necessary to look at international law, including treaty law, customary law and ad hoc legislation in order to analyse whether there was a legal basis for the intervention. In this project, legitimacy will be examined, drawing on Hedley Bull and Nicholas Wheeler from the pluralistic and the solidaristic side, respectively. This approach will be used to assess the legitimacy of the intervention from a normative, theoretical standpoint.
The analysis of the intervention has shown a number of factors that contributed to making the intervention both legal and legitimate. Based on the UN Charter, which in principle opposes warfare of any kind apart from the exceptions under Chapter VII, a mandate was legalized to protect civilians in the light of the threat to international peace and security, which the situation in Libya constituted. Next, the ad hoc legislative also made the intervention legal as a result of Res. 1973, which provided the authority to use all necessary means, with the exception of an occupying force, to protect civilians threatened by Gaddafi's regime. This paper also investigates whether intervention could be legalized from a customary law point of view, but this is proved to be impossible, despite the fact that there are great similarities between Res. 1973 and previous resolutions used to carry out humanitarian interventions.
Throughout the analysis of the legitimate basis for intervention, there are elements that speak both for and against the legitimacy of the intervention. Wheeler establishes some criteria which must be met before an intervention is legitimate; these are almost all fulfilled, but many with reservations. From a solidaristic point of view and based on the selected empirical data, the intervention was overall legitimate. From a pluralistic view and the selected data, the intervention was also legitimate in the sense that the situation in Libya threatened international peace and security, consistent with the pluralistic ranking of international order over justice.
The UN Security Council’s mandate to use all necessary means to protect civilians in Libya can be said to be legal and legitimate – however with reservations! This conclusion will provide a normative theoretical stance in relation to the intervention in Libya as regards its legality and legitimacy, as well as contributing to the general discussion on humanitarian interventions.

The following paper examines how the European Central Bank (ECB) has responded to the challenges ... more The following paper examines how the European Central Bank (ECB) has responded to the challenges of the financial and sovereign debt crisis within the EMU. First theory is introduced to get an understanding of the problems that the ECB faces. The theory regards central banking, optimum currency areas, and the monetary transmission mechanism. The theory is followed by an explanation of the crisis that struck the Eurozone in 2008, which revealed macroeconomic imbalances in the Eurozone. This leads to the analysis, which mainly focuses on analysing how the ECB has attempted to re-establish the singles of its monetary policy transmission through non-standard measures. In the light of the macroeconomic imbalances and the non-standard measures introduced by the ECB, two alternative solutions beyond the potential of the ECB are suggested.

The following paper examines how ‘financialization’ has evolved in the Eurozone. The first part i... more The following paper examines how ‘financialization’ has evolved in the Eurozone. The first part is a literature review, which defines and operationalizes the concept. It is followed by a comparative analysis with the US establishing that financialisation has occurred in the Eurozone, in a different fashion on some indicators. We then analyse the impact in the Eurozone following the crisis. This section determines that financialization has had consequences in terms of decreasing demand and increasing access to finance problems. The last chapter assesses the policy response in comparison to the US crisis. We find that the Eurozone has underperformed because of an insufficient regulatory framework. It is further discussed how Quantitative Easing, as used by the Fed in the US could be used in the Eurozone.

There has long been disagreement in the international society about humanitarian interventions an... more There has long been disagreement in the international society about humanitarian interventions and, in fact, the subject truly divides the English School into pluralism and solidarism. The dilemmas are many, but the weighting and ranking of state sovereignty versus human rights is absolutely essential. On the one hand, states or others are not allowed to interfere in the internal affairs of other states, because of the norm of sovereignty. But on the other hand, we are not prepared to just observe a population being exposed to a massacre. This dilemma made the former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan ask what we, as an international community, should do. The answer to this came in 2001 with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). It was still the states’ responsibility to secure the population's safety, but if it failed to do so, the responsibility passed on to the international community. R2P was later adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2005 and endorsed by the UN Security Council in 2006; it was used for the first time in the intervention in Libya in 2011.
The spring of 2011 was marked by citizens of several Arab states rebelling against their government and was later popularly called the Arab Spring. Libya was at that time the third country, after Tunisia and Egypt, where people rebelled against their regime. Peaceful demonstrations broke out and Moammar Mohammed Abu Minyar al-Qadhafi (Gaddafi) responded with fierce brutality. This made the UN Security Council react and the first response was a peaceful approach through Resolution 1970. Since these did not stop the violence from Gaddafi, Resolution 1973 was later adopted. This resolution mandated the use of all necessary means to protect the civilians, which ultimately resulted in humanitarian intervention. Around eight months after the first demonstrations in February 2011, Gaddafi was captured in October 2011 and subsequently executed. Based on the humanitarian intervention in Libya, it is interesting to examine how it was made legal, but also, and possibly even more interesting, to what extent this intervention was legitimate. As regards legality, it is necessary to look at international law, including treaty law, customary law and ad hoc legislation in order to analyse whether there was a legal basis for the intervention. In this project, legitimacy will be examined, drawing on Hedley Bull and Nicholas Wheeler from the pluralistic and the solidaristic side, respectively. This approach will be used to assess the legitimacy of the intervention from a normative, theoretical standpoint.
The analysis of the intervention has shown a number of factors that contributed to making the intervention both legal and legitimate. Based on the UN Charter, which in principle opposes warfare of any kind apart from the exceptions under Chapter VII, a mandate was legalized to protect civilians in the light of the threat to international peace and security, which the situation in Libya constituted. Next, the ad hoc legislative also made the intervention legal as a result of Res. 1973, which provided the authority to use all necessary means, with the exception of an occupying force, to protect civilians threatened by Gaddafi's regime. This paper also investigates whether intervention could be legalized from a customary law point of view, but this is proved to be impossible, despite the fact that there are great similarities between Res. 1973 and previous resolutions used to carry out humanitarian interventions.
Throughout the analysis of the legitimate basis for intervention, there are elements that speak both for and against the legitimacy of the intervention. Wheeler establishes some criteria which must be met before an intervention is legitimate; these are almost all fulfilled, but many with reservations. From a solidaristic point of view and based on the selected empirical data, the intervention was overall legitimate. From a pluralistic view and the selected data, the intervention was also legitimate in the sense that the situation in Libya threatened international peace and security, consistent with the pluralistic ranking of international order over justice.
The UN Security Council’s mandate to use all necessary means to protect civilians in Libya can be said to be legal and legitimate – however with reservations! This conclusion will provide a normative theoretical stance in relation to the intervention in Libya as regards its legality and legitimacy, as well as contributing to the general discussion on humanitarian interventions.