Andreas Schwenk Livres

United Nations Security Council reform has been a contentious issue since the Cold War, particularly regarding its representation of current global power dynamics. Since 2007, efforts to modernize the council, such as granting Germany a seat, have stalled. This work chronicles the history and key players in this debate, emphasizing U.S. and German roles while employing political discourse analysis and Q-methodology. Diplomats from both nations ranked their agreement with various stakeholder statements from government, business, academia, and media. Instead of relying on predetermined categories, this approach reveals the debate's parameters through new diplomatic insights. The findings led to two main narratives: Convinced Institutionalism and Cautious Institutionalism. Andreas Schwenk’s innovative methodology sheds light on the perspectives of German and U.S. diplomats, contributing to the ongoing discourse on reform. As noted by Doris Hertrampf, former German Ambassador, the study highlights the urgent need for reform in the face of increasing challenges to multilateralism. William B. Wood, former U.S. Ambassador, praised the rigorous analysis, noting the commitment to maintaining an effective Security Council amid diverse opinions on potential changes to its structure and powers.

Die Arbeit verfolgt das Ziel, unter Berücksichtigung der Entstehungsgeschichte der Formpflicht nach § 313 BGB a. F. die Entwicklung der Rechtsprechung zu dieser Norm nachzuzeichnen. Es wird versucht, Grundprinzipien aufzuzeigen, auf denen die untersuchten Urteile des Gerichts basieren. Dafür wurden alle veröffentlichten und auch die nicht veröffentlichten Urteile des Reichsgerichts zu § 313 BGB a. F. verwertet. Die Fundstellen der knapp 400 gesichteten Entscheidungen sind in einem Entscheidungsverzeichnis dokumentiert.