scholarly journals Israeli Nuclear Deterrence and International Law: Calculating Effects of Power Politics and Pandemics

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-350
Author(s):  
Louis Rene Beres
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Deterrence ◽  
Power Politics

         

Russland und das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker im postsowjetischen Raum

2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-26
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Rhetoric ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Regional Comparison ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Post Soviet Space

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its unclarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, i.e. to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This study situates Russia’s approach to the right to self- determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the study analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the topic, it is suggested that Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.

scholarly journals The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Mousseau
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Economic Opportunity ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
The Social ◽  
Great Power Politics ◽  
Social Market ◽  
Just Peace

Democracy does not cause peace among nations. Rather, domestic conditions cause both democracy and peace. From 1961 to 2001, democratic nations engaged in numerous fatal conflicts with each other, including at least one war, yet not a single fatal militarized incident occurred between nations with contract-intensive economies—those where most people have the opportunity to participate in the market. In contract-intensive economies, individuals learn to respect the choices of others and value equal application of the law. They demand liberal democracy at home and perceive it in their interest to respect the rights of nations and international law abroad. The consequences involve more than just peace: the contract-intensive democracies are in natural alliance against any actor—state or nonstate—that seeks to challenge Westphalian law and order. Because China and Russia lack contractualist economies, the economic divide will define great power politics in the coming decade. To address the challenges posed by China and Russia, preserve the Westphalian order, and secure their citizens from terrorism, the contract-intensive powers should focus their efforts on supporting global economic opportunity, rather than on promoting democracy.

Reading RP Anand in the Post-Colony

2019 ◽  
pp. 297-317
Author(s):  
Prabhakar Singh
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
New States ◽  
Functional Inclusion

Professor RP Anand analysed the birth of new states and their theoretical and functional inclusion in the post-UN world. The 1947 Indian independence afforded Indian lawyers a choice between Nehruvian internationalism and Judge Pal’s Tokyo dissent. Essentially, Anand preferred state interest over cultural differences as the currency of international law while celebrating the UN Charter, the International Court of Justice, and the UN Convention of the Law of Sea as the achievements of the mankind. Anand saw the rejection of international law as synonymous with power politics. While optimistic, his universalism engendered a Western anti-thesis that an Asian approach to international law, if any, was otiose. Subsequently, post-colonial scholars responded with a synthesis that brought colonialism from periphery to the centre of international legal theory.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Detailed Assessment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Open Question

The book provides a detailed assessment of Russia’s state practice in the post-Soviet space with the aim to ascertain a distinct Russian approach to the right of peoples to self-determination, illustrated by seven case studies on the secessionist conflicts over Abkhazia, Chechnya, Crimea, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Tatarstan, and Transnistria. As such, it may serve as a detailed documentation of the raw material necessary to form and identify rules of customary international law, produced by one particular state. Beyond that, it seeks to test the accuracy of and give substance to Lauri Mälksoo’s general assessment in Russian Approaches to International Law that the ‘evolution of Moscow’s legal argumentation and views in these complex cases … has not followed some overarching legal principle but reflected changing power politics. Until 2014, Russia claimed that sovereignty trumped self-determination but in 2014 partly destroyed its own earlier argumentation by its own actions in Ukraine.’ Finally, this book is a contribution to what Mälksoo calls the ‘debatable nexus’ between legal scholarship and state practice of international law in Russia, that is the open question of to what extent international law as an academic discipline continues to be subjugated to the raison d’état in Russia.

The Ethics of Power in American Diplomacy: The Statecraft of John Quincy Adams

1990 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel G. Lang ◽  
Greg Russell
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Diplomatic History ◽  
Political Ethics ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
American Power ◽  
Universal System ◽  
History Of ◽  
American Diplomacy

The article defends the proposition that the distinctive diplomatic legacy of John Quincy Adams constitutes an important case study documenting the significance of moral reasoning in the statesman's obligation to uphold the national interest in a universal system of power politics. Recourse to political ethics afforded Adams a vantage point from which to evaluate the volatile problem of intervention—viewed in terms of the moral responsibilities and limits of American power—at a crucial turning point in the diplomatic history of the young republic. Important in this connection is how Adams attempted to reconcile the blessings of liberty with the methods and purposes of American diplomacy within and beyond the Western Hemisphere.An attempt is made to evaluate the sources and meaning of statesmanship for Adams who—as perhaps the nation's most experienced diplomat and accomplished Secretary of State—judged the limits and opportunities of American power from a perspective that considered moral precepts and international law as compatible with the prudent pursuit of American national interest in world affairs.

The relevance of international law: a Hegelian interpretation of a peculiar seventeenth-century preoccupation

1995 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Ringmar
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Do So

International law, traditional scholars of international politics tell us, is a useless fiction. Statesmen either do not follow legal stipulations or they do so only when it is in their interest to do it. International law plays no independent role in world politics since it can always be reduced to the more fundamental considerations of power politics. National interests simply do not bow to legal requirements.

Princes’ Justifications of War in Early Modern Europe: The Constitution of an International Community by Communication

2021 ◽  
pp. 65-80
Author(s):  
Anuschka Tischer
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
International Law ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
International Order ◽  
The Political ◽  
Early Modern Europe ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Early Modernity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Modern Europe

Anuschka Tischer starts out with the historical analyses of the book by elaborating the dialectic of war discourses and international order in early modernity: according to Tischer, nearly every prince in early modern Europe came up with a ‘just reason’ when going to war. Whereas the theory of international law represented academic opinions, the political justifications offered the official view which fed into the public discourse. By referring to a general international law in their war declarations (and counter-declarations), the belligerent parties shaped the pattern of today’s modern international law. However, the early modern justifications represented the political and social values of pre-revolutionary Europe. While international law was regarded as universal, the European Christian powers distinguished between wars in and outside of Europe. The chapter reveals the contradictions inherent in this distinction by analysing how princes in early modern Europe justified their wars, which norms and orders were accepted, and how far international law was the result of elaborate discussions and power politics. Tischer’s findings are picked up by Hendrik Simon in his contribution on the nineteenth-century discourse of war and international order.

Russia and the Right to Self-Determination in the Post-Soviet Space

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Rhetoric ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
South Ossetia ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Post Soviet Space

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its lack of clarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, that is to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since, the distinction was made, been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This book situates Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘Western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the book analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation, illustrated by a total of seven case studies on the conflicts over Abkhazia, Chechnya, Crimea, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Tatarstan, and Transnistria. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the right to self-determination, it is suggested that Russia’s approach may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document