Agreement Between War

The exchanges of prisoners of war and interned civilians held by Greece and Turkey respectively are the subject of a separate agreement between these powers, signed in Lausanne on 30 January 1923. On the other hand, Wise adds (2018) that peace agreements sometimes exclude and marginalize non-dominant ethnic groups, leading to exclusion amid the inclusion dilemma (EAI), leading to an integrated error in the territory`s self-management system. Jana, Werner and Piia (2018) have extended the inclusion exclusion grant from a gender point of view. Their research shows that between 1990 and 2014, women signed only 13 out of 130 cases (Jana, Werner and Piia, 2018). Several scientists, including Thania Paffenholz (2014) and McGregor (2006), argue that the sustainability of peace agreements depends on broader support from civil society, consisting of voluntary organizations and groups such as religious institutions, women`s organizations and human rights groups (Krznaric, 1999). Orjuela, 2003). Nilsson (2012) notes that civil society participation will reduce the risk of agreements failure by 64%. Life insurance contracts between an insurer and a person who later became an enemy are not considered to have been dissolved by the outbreak of war or by the fact that the person becomes an enemy. Nuclear war between them and between one of the contracting parties and other countries. Subject to any agreement between the High Contracting Parties, decisions and decisions taken from 30 October 1918 until the entry into force of this treaty by or in agreement with the authorities of the powers that occupied Constantinople, as well as on the property, rights and interests of their nationals, foreigners or Turkish nationals. , as well as on the relations of these people with the authorities of Turkey, is considered definitive and does not claim the powers or their authority.

The article is structured as follows. The first part begins with the context of the study, while the second part examines the existing literature to explain the political factors that influence the implementation of peace agreements. The third part proposes a pathway for future research on the link between government turnover and the implementation of peace agreements, while the last and fourth part conclude the article with a summary of the entire discussion. On the other hand, the turnover of the marginalized (i.e. when a new government coalition comes to power) hinders the progress of a peace agreement because foreign leaders play the role of “shadow veto players” (Ryckman and Braithwaite, 2017). Kauffman argues that the leaders of the marginalized do not have enough information about the peace process, which prevents them from deciding when to end the war (Cited by Ryckman and Braithwaite, 2017). Mansfield and Snider (1995) claim that some political leaders, motivated by personal gain, come to power with a war agenda. In addition, they fear losing the next election if their national and international hawkish supporters withdraw their support for the government. On the basis of the fundamental principles of relations between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, signed in Moscow on 29 May 1972, the following economic or technical treaties, agreements and multilateral agreements will enter into force as soon as this treaty enters into force and subject to their provisions, between Turkey and the other contracting parties of the contracting parties. The governments concerned appoint, by appointment, a secretary general for each court and each join one or more secretaries.