703 research outputs found
Filling in the Gaps: Extrasystemic Mechanisms for Addressing Imbalances between the International Legal Operating System and the Normative System
What happens when there is an imbalance between the operating and normative systems of international law? One obvious outcome is nothing; the imbalance remains, and the norms of the system are not given full effect. For example, human rights provisions abound, but they can be widely ignored in the absence of enforcement mechanisms. In this article, we identify several other possibilities. Our contention is that adaptations occur that compensate for, or at least mitigate, the effects of the operating-normative systems imbalance. Specifically, we explore four kinds of extrasystemic (at least from the perspective of the international legal system) adaptations: (1) actions by nongovernmental organizations and transnational networks, (2) internalization of international law, (3) domestic legal and political processes, and (4) soft law mechanisms. Our contention is that the international legal system is partly kept functioning by these actors and mechanisms, even though they technically fall outside the framework of the international legal system
Irrational War and Constitutional Design: A Reply to Professors Nzelibe and Yoo
This Reply proceeds as follows. Part I outlines the argument of the Nzelibe and Yoo paper. Part II considers their principal-agent analysis in the context of the American political system. Part III elaborates on the democratic peace literature, demonstrating that it does not support the conclusions that they draw. Part IV addresses the argument that we are in a new strategic situation, such that old rules ought not apply. Part V concludes
Irrational War and Constitutional Design: A Reply to Professors Nzelibe and Yoo
This Reply proceeds as follows. Part I outlines the argument of the Nzelibe and Yoo paper. Part II considers their principal-agent analysis in the context of the American political system. Part III elaborates on the democratic peace literature, demonstrating that it does not support the conclusions that they draw. Part IV addresses the argument that we are in a new strategic situation, such that old rules ought not apply. Part V concludes
Worth A Pound Of Cure? An Empirical Assessment Of The Bush Doctrine And Preventive Military Action
The Bush Doctrine, or the proposal that allows the use of military force preventively to address prospective attack from terrorists or involving weapons of mass destruction, has been debated from various normative and legal vantage points. In this article, we introduce the new evaluative criterion that such military action must also produce the desired outcomes of defeating opponents and preventing future attacks. We test the efficacy of preventive military actions over the last two centuries. We conclude that using military force in a preventive fashion provides very limited, if any value, to states that employ this strategy. At best, there is less than an even chance of victory in such circumstances and this requires a full-scale war. The utility of preventive strikes diminishes tremendously in attacks short of war, and indeed the minimal success rate (around 10%) is no better than using coercive diplomacy by merely threatening force rather than actually using it. Preventive actions also did not significantly delay the appearance of new security threats and indeed such actions produce the conditions that enhance the maintenance of international rivalries, rather than contributing to their resolution. Finally, available evidence suggests that preventive strikes are not well-suited to terrorist threats, and states might be reluctant to employ them in any case. Studies of retaliation to terrorist attacks find little value to the former, with no long term deterrent effects
United Nations election supervision in South Africa? Lessons from the Namibian peacekeeping experience
Arms Control & Domestic and International Security (ACDIS
Territorial changes and future international conflict
Arms Control & Domestic and International Security (ACDIS
United Nations peacekeeping operations: Some win-win applications
Arms Control & Domestic and International Security (ACDIS
Bridging the International Law-International Relations Divide: Taking Stock of Progress
International law (IL) and international relations (IR) have long been considered separate academic enterprises, with their own theoretical orientations, methodologies, and publishing outlets.
The net effect has been that the insights and research findings of one discipline have largely been unknown or ignored in the other. This has occurred despite the commonality of focusing on many of the same substantive interests, namely international cooperation in general, issues of war and peace, environmental regulation, and trade. This has led to numerous calls over the past two decades to bridge the international law and international relations divide. Yet one recent work claims that the frequency of such appeals have exceeded the number of efforts to fulfill those suggestions. Others have claimed that there are large and growing intersections between the fields. How much progress has been made in the last two decades toward bridging the gap between international law and international relations? Various claims have been made, but little systematic evidence has been produced. In particular, the evidence offered has not necessarily been able to document the form and depth of the international relations-international law interface.
This study examines the progress, or perhaps the lack thereof, made over the last twenty years in bringing together the disciplines of international law and international relations. In doing so, we survey two leading journals in international law and five prominent journals in international relations over the period 1990-2010, searching for cross-pollination of ideas and approaches. We also examine an interdisciplinary journal, the primary purpose of which has been to facilitate collaboration across the two disciplines. When considering the international law journals, we look at the extent to which social science methods and objectives, as well as international relations subject matter, have been reflected in the articles. In international relations journals, we consider whether international law has become a subject matter of scholarly inquiry, given that it was largely ignored for many years. The goal is to track over time the intersection of the two disciplines and describe the extent and type of their interaction.
We begin with a discussion of how the two disciplines became separated after an early period of convergence, explain the fundamental bases that led to the divide, and characterize their contemporary differences. We then examine the various pleas for integration and how these might be accomplished. We note some recent trends toward reconciliation between IL and IR. These sections serve as a prelude to our empirical analysis of published articles, where we describe our choice of journals and the dimensions of analysis. We present our findings on whether and by how much the gap between international law and international relations has been bridged. This includes an overview of the international law articles studied, specific analyses of law and political science journals respectively, and a consideration of an interdisciplinary journal. Finally, we summarize our findings and discuss their implications for the future of IL-IR research
Connection between the elastic GEp/GMp and P to Delta form factors
It is suggested that the falloff in Qsq of the P to Delta magnetic form
factor GM* is related to the recently observed falloff of the elastic electric
form factor GEp/GMp. Calculation is carried out in the framework of a GPD
mechanism
- …