Download Free The National Interest On International Law And Order Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The National Interest On International Law And Order and write the review.

"May 2009."--T.p.
International law and the nature of the global order is regularly examined and debated among specialists. This volume brings together in one place twenty-four articles addressing these subjects, written by some of America's leading academics, lawyers, and policymakers, and originally published in The National Interest, a leading realist journal of international affairs.Prominent jurists, lawyers, and practitioners debate the role that international law should play in the formulation of policy in the first section, and whether 'international law' really exists. Authors explore such questions as the enforceable norms of global behavior, and if American foreign policy should conform to such regulations. A second section looks at the viability and utility of international institutions in advancing U.S. interests. Included are debates over the role and purpose of the United Nations and the International Criminal Court. A third Section deals with the intersection of law enforcement and foreign policy. It explores such questions as whether primary responsibility for combating global terrorism and the international drug trade should be vested with law enforcement agencies or whether it should fall under the purview of foreign policy.The final portion of the book is devoted to the question of human rights, particularly the tripartite debate between Robin Fox, Francis Fukuyama, and William F. Schulz over the nature and origins of human rights. Among the questions considered are whether human rights are an outgrowth of natural law, or are natural imperatives at odds with protecting individual dignities and freedoms. Is there a universal standard of rights, or are human rights norms derived from majority consensus?The list of distinguished contributors to this volume include John Bolton, Robert Bork, Lee Casey, Douglas Feith, Owen Harries, Senator Jesse Helms, Alan Keyes, Irving Kristol, Joseph Nye, Jeremy Rabkin, David Rivkin, Alfred P. Rubin, and Abrahama Sofaer. This volume will be of interest to legal scholars, political scientists, and students of diplomacy and international relations.
This work tries to bridge the gap between international lawyers and those political scientists who write about international politics. In the first part, the author discusses the influence of Professor Morgenthau's realist school on the current thinking of political scientists and the abandonment of this school by its originator in the last years of his life. The author concludes that the best way to test the validity of different approaches is to discuss various international crises in the light of contrasting theories and to analyze each situation from both the legal and political points of view. In particular, he tries to ascertain to what extent vital national interests could be accommodated within an international legal framework, or could require a distortion of international rules in order to achieve national objectives. In the second part, the author dissects the Entebbe raid, where Israeli forces rescued a group of hostages being detained by hijackers at a Ugandan airport. His analysis shows the deficiencies of the international system in dealing with such a complex issue, where several contradictory principles of international law could be applied and were defended by various protagonists. The third part starts with a parallel problem--the Iranian hostages crisis, where a group of U.S. officials found themselves in an unprecedented situation of being captured by a band of students. A critical analysis of the handling of this problem by the Carter Administration is followed by vignettes of other crises faced by the Administration and by its successor, the Reagan Administration. This part is less analytical and more prescriptive. The author is no long satisfied with pointing out what went wrong; instead, he departs from the usual hands-off policy of political scientists and tries to indicate how much better each situation could have been handled if the decision makers had been paying more attention to international law and international organizations. The theme is slowly developed that in the long run national interest is better served not by practicing power politics and relying on the use of threat of force but by strengthening those international institutions that can provide a neutral environment for first slowing down a crisis and then finding an equitable solution acceptable to most of the parties in conflict. The value of this book lies primarily in giving the reader a real insight into several important issues of today that are familiar to most people only from newspaper headlines and television news. While not everybody can agree with all his criticisms of the mistakes of various governments, there is an honest attempt by the author to present issues impartially and to let the blame fall where it may. Being both an international lawyer and a political scientist, the author has had the advantage of combining the methodology of these two social sciences into a rich tapestry with some startling shades and tones.
Focusing on a range of regional cases, the book evaluates the respective weight of national interest and internationalist (solidarity) considerations. Ultimately, while classical national interest considerations remain to this day a powerful motivation for power projection, the book shows how an enlightened conception of national interest can encompass solidarity concerns, and how such a balancing of the imperatives of both national interest and solidarity is the major challenge facing decision-makers.--Publisher's description.
One volume of multi-volume history of international law.
What lies in the common interest of the international community? How are those common interests protected? What is the role of states and of the international community? This book looks at the protection of common interests and shows how international law is progressively moving away from a system based on territorial sovereignty to a system based on shared responsibilities among states and other actors.
Ever since its first publication in 1992, the New York Times bestselling The End of History and the Last Man has provoked controversy and debate. "Profoundly realistic and important...supremely timely and cogent...the first book to fully fathom the depth and range of the changes now sweeping through the world." —The Washington Post Book World Francis Fukuyama's prescient analysis of religious fundamentalism, politics, scientific progress, ethical codes, and war is as essential for a world fighting fundamentalist terrorists as it was for the end of the Cold War. Now updated with a new afterword, The End of History and the Last Man is a modern classic.
Whatever happened to multilateral peacekeeping? This is the central question Jean-Marc Coicaud explores in this penetrating scholarly examination of the period of robust UN-mandated peacekeeping missions in humanitarian crises. The most notable peace operations during this period were undertaken by the three leading NATO powers the United States foremost among them in the immediate post Cold War era. Yet, as Coicaud explains, the international democratic solidarity that unified their multilateral action against a Soviet threat was stretched thin in the post Cold War era, which manifested an entirely new set of threats to international security such as ethnic cleansing and failed states. The three leading Western powers were ill-equipped to handle them effectively in terms of the fundamental political theory and applied political philosophy that generally informed their traditional foreign policies. The book concludes with guidelines for more effective realization of international interests among the Western powers and an afterword on the book s lessons applied to Darfur."
American reluctance to join the International Criminal Court illuminates important trends in international security and a central dilemma facing U.S. Foreign policy in the 21st century. The ICC will prosecute individuals who commit egregious international human rights violations such as genocide. The Court is a logical culmination of the global trends toward expanding human rights and creating international institutions. The U.S., which fostered these trends because they served American national interests, initially championed the creation of an ICC. The Court fundamentally represents the triumph of American values in the international arena. Yet the United States now opposes the ICC for fear of constraints upon America's ability to use force to protect its national interests. The principal national security and constitutional objections to the Court, which the volume explores in detail, inflate the potential risks inherent in joining the ICC. More fundamentally, they reflect a belief in American exceptionalism that is unsustainable in today's world. Court opponents also underestimate the growing salience of international norms and institutions in addressing emerging threats to U.S. national interests. The misguided assessments that buttress opposition to the ICC threaten to undermine American leadership and security in the 21st century more gravely than could any international institution.