scholarly journals The Legal Principles of Bethlehem & Operation Timber Sycamore: The “Islamist Winter” Pre-Emptively Targets “Arab Life” by Hiring “Arab Barbarians”

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Khaled Al-Kassimi
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Philosophical Theology ◽  
Sovereign Power ◽  
Ontological Security ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Arab Muslim ◽  
Epistemic Violence ◽  
Cultural Experiences ◽  
Secular Humanist

The following legal-historical research is critical of “Islamist” narratives and their desacralized reverberations claiming that Arab-Muslim receptivity to terror is axiomatic to “cultural experiences” figuring subjects conforming to Arab-Islamic philosophical theology. The critique is founded on deconstructing—while adopting a Third World Approach to International Law (TWAIL)—the (im)moral consequences resulting from such rhetoric interpreting the Arab uprising of 2011 from the early days as certainly metamorphosing into an “Islamist Winter”. This secular-humanist hypostasis reminded critics that International Law and International Relations continues to assert that Latin-European philosophical theology furnishes the exclusive temporal coordinates required to attain “modernity” as telos of history and “civil society” as ethos of governance. In addition, the research highlights that such culturalist assertation—separating between law and morality—tolerates secular logic decriminalizing acts patently violating International Law since essentializing Arab-Muslims as temporally positioned “outside law” provides liberal-secular modernity ontological security. Put differently, “culture talk” affirms that since a secular-humanist imaginary of historical evolution stipulates that it is “inevitable” and “natural” that any “non-secular” Arab protests will unavoidably lead to lawlessness, it therefore becomes imperative to suspiciously approach the “Islamist” narrative of 2011 thus deconstructing the formulation of juridical doctrines (i.e., Bethlehem Legal Principles) decriminalizing acts arising from a principle of pre-emption “moralizing” demographic and geographic alterations (i.e., Operation Timber Sycamore) across Arabia. The research concludes that jus gentium continues to be characterized by a temporal inclusive exclusion with its redemptive ramifications—authorized by sovereign power—catalyzing “epistemic violence” resulting in en-masse exodus and slayed bodies across Arabia.

Universal International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 529-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Charney
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
State Behavior ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Uniform State ◽  
The Common ◽  
Multilateral Treaties

In this shrinking world, states are increasingly interdependent and interconnected, a development that has affected international law. Early international law dealt with bilateral relations between autonomous states. The principal subjects until well into this century were diplomatic relations, war, treaties and the law of the sea. One of the most significant developments in international law during the twentieth century has been the expanded role played by multilateral treaties addressed to the common concerns of states. Often they clarify and improve rules of international law through the process of rendering them in binding written agreements. These treaties also promote the coordination of uniform state behavior in a variety of areas. International organizations, themselves the creatures of multilateral treaties, have also assumed increasing prominence in the last half of this century. They contribute to the coordination and facilitation of contemporary international relations on the basis of legal principles.

scholarly journals The global governance problem in the modern Western academic literature: the main approaches and concepts

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-77
Author(s):  
Andrei Andreevich Kovalev ◽  
Ekaterina Yur'evna Knyazeva
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Modern Age ◽  
The World

The global governance theories assessment is among the poorly studied problems in Russian political science, though its topicality in the modern age of civilizational confrontation is beyond dispute. Primarily, the necessity to study the key global governance concepts is determined by the need for establishing effective relations with the Western and the Eastern countries. The purpose of the article is to analyze and estimate the main foreig global governance concepts, and it is achieved by solving the following tasks: 1) to consider the main definitions of global governance; 2) to detect the problem of legitimacy in international relations; 3) to consider the legitimacy of global governance. The authors give special attention to the underestimated source of global governance legitimacy - the liberal legal principles. As a political program, global governance is understood as a political and legal aspect of globalization. In recent decades, global governance theories have been adopted as a research program in the field of social sciences. Within the (neo)liberal institutionalism tradition, particularly, the interdependence theories, global governance approaches consider the consolidation of international cooperation and the transformation of the global system in which the anarchical system of sovereign national states is considered as a multilayer system including nongovernmental subjects. The researchers try to model power as “governance” without subjects which  are formally justified and entitled with the use of force monopoly. The future of global governance is connected with effective international law able to timely settle the arising disputes and deter possible aggression which, in the age of civilizational confrontation, can lead to the last war in human history. The effectiveness of global governance depends on what globalization direction the leading civilizations will choose: the force-based American way, or the way taking into account the interests of most peoples of the world.   

scholarly journals De-Historicizing (Mainstream) Ottoman Historiography on Tanzimat and Tahdith: Jus Gentium and Pax Britannica ViolateOsmanli Sovereignty in Arabia

Histories ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 218-255
Author(s):  
Khaled Al-Kassimi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cultural Difference ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Philosophical Theology ◽  
Age Of Reason ◽  
Self Image ◽  
Regulatory Measures ◽  
Secular Humanist ◽  
19Th And 20Th Century

The (secular-humanist) philosophical theology governing (positivist) disciplines such as International Law and International Relations precludes a priori any communicative examination of how the exclusion of Arab-Ottoman jurisprudence is necessary for the ontological coherence of jurisprudent concepts such as society and sovereignty, together with teleological narratives constellating the “Age of Reason” such as modernity and civilization. The exercise of sovereignty by the British Crown—in 19th and 20th century Arabia—consisted of (positivist) legal doctrines comprising “scientific processes” denying Ottoman legal sovereignty, thereby proceeding to “order” societies situated in Dar al-Islam and “detach” Ottoman-Arab subjects from their Ummah. This “rational exercise” of power by the British Crown—mythologizing an unbridgeable epistemological gap between a Latin-European subject as civic and an objectified Ottoman-Arab as despotic—legalized (regulatory) measures referencing ethno/sect-centric paradigms which not only “deported” Ottoman-Arab ijtihad (Eng. legal reasoning and exegetic hermeneutics) from the realm of “international law”, but also rationalized geographic demarcations and demographic alterations across Ottoman-Arab vilayets. Both inter-related disciplines, therefore, affirm an “exclusionary self-image” when dealing with “foreign epistemologies” by transforming “cultural difference” into “legal difference”, thus suing that it is in the protection of jus gentium that “recognized sovereigns” exercise redeeming measures on “Turks”, “Moors”, or “Arabs”. It is precisely the knowledge lost ensuing from such irreflexive “positivist image” that this legal-historical research seeks to deconstruct by moving beyond a myopic analysis claiming Ottoman-Arab ‘Umran (Eng. civilization) as homme malade (i.e., sick man); or that the Caliphate attempted but failed to become reasonable during the 18th and 19th century because it adhered to Arab-Islamic philosophical theology. Therefore, this research commits to deconstructing “mainstream” Ottoman historiography claiming that tanzimat (Eng. reorganization) and tahdith (Eng. modernization) were simply “degenerative periods” affirming the temporal “backwardness” of Ottoman civilization and/or the innate incapacity of its epistemology in furnishing a (modern) civil society.

PENERAPAN PRINSIP PERSONA NON GRATA TERHADAP DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENGANIAYAAN TKI OLEH DUTA BESAR ARAB SAUDI DI JERMAN)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.

Solving the Internet Jurisdiction Puzzle

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Jerker B. Svantesson
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Data Privacy ◽  
Modern World ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Reform Initiatives ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
History Of

Internet jurisdiction has emerged as one of the greatest and most urgent challenges online, severely affecting areas as diverse as e-commerce, data privacy, law enforcement, content take-downs, cloud computing, e-health, Cyber security, intellectual property, freedom of speech, and Cyberwar. In this innovative book, Professor Svantesson presents a vision for a new approach to Internet jurisdiction––for both private international law and public international law––based on sixteen years of research dedicated specifically to the topic. The book demonstrates that our current paradigm remains attached to a territorial thinking that is out of sync with our modern world, especially, but not only, online. Having made the claim that our adherence to the territoriality principle is based more on habit than on any clear and universally accepted legal principles, Professor Svantesson advances a new jurisprudential framework for how we approach jurisdiction. He also proposes several other reform initiatives such as the concept of ‘investigative jurisdiction’ and an approach to geo-blocking, aimed at equipping us to solve the Internet jurisdiction puzzle. In addition, the book provides a history of Internet jurisdiction, and challenges our traditional categorisation of different types of jurisdiction. It places Internet jurisdiction in a broader context and outlines methods for how properly to understand and work with rules of Internet jurisdiction. While Solving the Internet Puzzle paints a clear picture of the concerns involved and the problems that needs to be overcome, this book is distinctly aimed at finding practical solutions anchored in a solid theoretical framework.

Hobbes among the Classic Jurists

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Boucher
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Law Of Nature ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Complete Identification ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Hedley Bull ◽  
Hans Morgenthau

The classic foundational status that Hobbes has been afforded by contemporary international relations theorists is largely the work of Hans Morgenthau, Martin Wight, and Hedley Bull. They were not unaware that they were to some extent creating a convenient fiction, an emblematic realist, a shorthand for all of the features encapsulated in the term. The detachment of international law from the law of nature by nineteenth-century positivists opened Hobbes up, even among international jurists, to be portrayed as almost exclusively a mechanistic theorist of absolute state sovereignty. If we are to endow him with a foundational place at all it is not because he was an uncompromising realist equating might with right, on the analogy of the state of nature, but instead to his complete identification of natural law with the law of nations. It was simply a matter of subject that distinguished them, the individual and the state.

scholarly journals Remarks by Maria Flores

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Maria Flores
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Small Department ◽  
The University

I first became involved with international law while I was at university. After graduating, I decided to teach public international law. As an undergraduate, I particularly enjoyed this branch of study. I was attracted to it because it helped me to understand the problems, challenges, and breakthroughs in the field of international relations on a global scale. Therefore, after facing a competitive entry process, I joined the international law department of the Universidad de la República. It was a small department, but the university had produced some well-known scholars like Eduardo Jiménez de Aréchaga, who became a judge at the International Court of Justice, and Hector Gross Espiell, who served as a judge at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document