This article examines the Palestinian Authority’s fiscal responses to the withholding of clearance revenues crisis from 1997 to 2022, a critical issue rooted in international economic agreements. Since data for subsequent years were unavailable due to the impact of war (Gaza War), the analysis focuses on data up to 2022.The Paris Protocol, which governs economic relations between Israel and Palestine, establishes a customs union characterized by the absence of economic borders between the two sides and relies on a joint economic committee. Using data from official reports issued by the Ministry of Finance and the Palestine Monetary Authority, this study uses descriptive statistics and regression analysis to explore the relationship between current expenditures and clearance tax revenues. The results show a positive association between these expenditures and revenues, highlighting the significant impact of withheld funds on fiscal policy. The research highlights the need to renegotiate the Paris Economic Protocol to address structural weaknesses and prevent recurring fiscal crises. Recommendations include enhancing the efficiency of the tax system, diversifying revenue sources, and rationalizing spending to enhance fiscal stability. By placing the analysis in a broader context of international economic relations, this study contributes to understanding the interaction between domestic fiscal crises and international agreements. These findings have implications for policymakers and international stakeholders seeking to promote sustainable economic growth and mitigate the risks of unequal economic arrangements.
The Kashmir conflict remains one of the most enduring geopolitical disputes in South Asia, symbolizing broader tensions between India and Pakistan. While existing studies have predominantly examined the issue through realist or postcolonial lenses, comparatively limited attention has been given to how evolving geopolitical discourses actively reshape national identities, legitimize power claims, and constrain pathways for conflict resolution. Employing the framework of Critical Geopolitics and qualitative discourse analysis, this study investigates how state actors, media institutions, and international bodies construct competing geopolitical imaginaries of Kashmir. It argues that these discursive practices—rooted in postcolonial legacies and reinforced by contemporary great-power rivalries—reproduce Kashmir as a symbolic arena of legitimacy, sovereignty, and existential security rather than a negotiable political space. This analysis demonstrates that entrenched discursive framings do not merely describe the conflict but actively sustain it by constraining diplomatic thinking and marginalizing local voices and alternative perspectives. By reconceptualizing Kashmir as a discursive and identity-based struggle, this study advances critical geopolitical scholarship while offering policy relevant insights. It underscores the need for discourse-sensitive and inclusive approaches that move beyond territorial fixation toward mutual recognition and cooperative security.
This article examines the challenges of promoting human rights in Southeast Asia. It focuses on the limited effectiveness of the regional human rights regime, which is influenced by ASEAN leaders’ strong emphasis on state sovereignty and the uneven adoption of democratic governance among member states. The study aims is to identify the factors that hinder the promotion of human rights within ASEAN and to analyze the relationship between the levels of democracy and prioritization of human rights in the region. Using a qualitative research approach, the study analyzes the development of human rights cooperation in ASEAN through the lens of Regime Theory in International Relations. The findings indicate that the promotion of human rights in Southeast Asia is constrained by fragile political commitment among ASEAN leaders and by significant variations in democratic governance across member states. These differences shape national priorities and influence the extent to which human rights norms are internalized within the regional framework. The study concludes that the effectiveness of human rights promotion in ASEAN is closely linked to the level of democratic development among member states. The findings highlight important implications for regional policy-making and underscore the need to address the tension between sovereignty norms and human rights commitments in order to strengthen the institutionalization of the regional human rights regime.
This study examines the trajectory through which Hainan, an island province of China, has emerged as an international actor. Drawing on the analytical framework of subnational diplomacy and employing a qualitative research approach, this study analyses the factors that have enabled Hainan to function as an international actor across four dimensions: motivation, opportunity, strategy, and presence. A comparative analysis is conducted with Guangxi, China’s southwestern subnational region bordering countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The findings indicate that the trajectory of Hainan’s international participation has been shaped by a combination of factors, including its geographical location, resource endowment, economic conditions, local leadership, and national strategies. These factors have contributed to Hainan’s distinctive role in China’s foreign relations, which differs from Guangxi’s primarily ASEAN-oriented engagement. By highlighting this contrast, the study demonstrates the diverse patterns of international participation among Chinese provinces and contributes to expanding existing research on China’s subnational actors in foreign affairs.
The 1962 Water Agreement between the State of Johor and the Government of Singapore, then a British Crown Colony, has long been a source of tension in Malaysia-Singapore relations. It reflects deeper contestations over sovereign rights, asymmetric interdependence, and divergent strategic priorities. Under this agreement, Johor granted Singapore the right to extract up to 250 million gallons of raw water per day at a fixed rate of RM0.03 (SG$0.01) per 1,000 gallons. While initially justified as a developmental concession during the decolonisation period, this rate is now widely regarded by Malaysian policymakers as economically inequitable and as undermining resource sovereignty. The issue is further complicated by Singapore’s resale of treated water to Johor at RM0.50 per 1,000 gallons, significantly higher than the original rate, thereby exacerbating public dissatisfaction and highlighting the uneven terms of exchange. This study examines the political economy of water pricing concessions in Malaysia-Singapore relations through the analytical lens of hydro hegemony and cost-benefit analysis, employing a qualitative methodology based on document analysis and international case comparison. The research situates the 1962 agreement within broader discourses on transboundary water diplomacy, drawing insights from other geopolitical cases such as the Jordan River (Israel and Palestine), the Indus Waters Treaty (India and Pakistan), the Mekong River Commission, and the Great Lakes Agreement (United States and Canada). The findings indicate that Malaysia bears disproportionate economic costs due to outdated pricing structures, while Singapore retains strategic advantages through legal and infrastructural leverage. The study concludes by recommending a revision of the bilateral framework toward a more flexible, cost-reflective, and ecologically balanced model aligned with international norms in transboundary water governance.
