Dissecting The Lawfulness Of United States Foreign Policy: Classroom Debates As Pedagogical Devices

Simulations can be used as educational exercises that enable students in the classroom to appreciate better the difficulties and nuances of legal issues affecting international relations

Burning International Bridges, Fuelling Global Discontent: The United States and Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol

This address was presented on 31 October 2001 by Professor Christopher C. Joyner as the 2001 Quentin Quentin-Baxter Memorial Lecture at the Victoria University of Wellington School of Law.Professor Joyner came to New Zealand as a Visiting Canterbury Fellow with the School of Law and Gateway Antarctica at the University of Canterbury from September through December 2001.This paper tackles the controversy surrounding the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol by the United States of America. The paper's particular focus is the international effect of rejection. An updated epilogue discusses the result of the conclusion of the United Nation's Climate Change Convention, and the reaction of the United States

Book Review

The message sounded in Marine Pollution and the Law of the Sea is that it is not too late. International law can still be fashioned to control marine pollution more prudently, more effectively, and more comprehensively. The critical ingredient, however, for obtaining this self-imposed policy of international legal restraint is generation of the national political will among polluter governments to do so. To work efficaciously, law first must be agreed upon, then subscribed to, and ultimately, either obeyed or enforced. If international policies and programs are to work, governments must want them to work. In this modern era of rising economic expectations, spreading industrialization, and increasing interdependence among states, securing genuine commitment from governments to exercise this internationally-oriented political will for checking their own national marine pollution activities will not come easily. Nevertheless, the irrepressible fact remains that the political will and the law must eventually come, or present trends of increasing marine pollution must inevitably change course. Otherwise, having an international law for regulating the oceans should hardly matter. Dead seas will not require much in the way of legal regulation