Search results

Pitanje prava drzava na samoodbranu je jedno od fundamentalnih pitanja medjunarodnog javnog prava. Ovo nacelo koji postoji koliko i samo medjunarodno pravo, formulisano je na univerzalan nacin sredinom proslog vijeka, i postoje mnogi pisani radovi o njegovoj izradi i tumacenju. Pozivanje na samoodbranu kroz cijelu istoriju je koristeno kao opravdanje za zloupotrebu sile od strane drzava van svojih teritorija. ; Question of right of states to self-defense is one of the fundamental questions of public international law. This principle, which exists just as long as public international law does, was formulated in universal manner by the mid 20th century and there are many written works on its formulation and interpretation. Invoking self-defense during the course of history was used as a pretext for the use of force by the states outside of its territories. Right of states to self-defense originates from customary international law. During antic and medieval times, principle of self-defense was linked to the theory of just war which was differently interpreted in different times. In the period between two world wars, still there was no absolute prohibition of the use of force in international relations so the principle of self-defense was linked to the right of self-help through use of different forcible measures: retorsions, reprisals, naval blockade, intervention and demonstration of naval power. Contrary to the period of League of Nations, mechanism of implementation of international law was centralized by the foundation of the United Nations because a single body – Security Council – was entrusted with the authority to determine when the use of force is allowed in international law. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter defines that the states have a right to individual or collective self-defense in case of armed attack on the UN member state. This right is considered legitimate until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

The term politics, from its origin until nowadays, has been closely related to coercion and effects of coercion. The first rulers were finding support in a belief in the divine nature of power, but since, in time, this belief faded, the solution was found in physical superiority of rulers. The development of politics as an activity by which a community can be governed instrumentally, conditioned its closer linkage to force. Politics was sometimes identified with force, and sometimes politics was using force as an instrument for taming the bullying by others. Undoubtedly, the man is a rational and instinctive being. Monopolization of bullying within political activity made it possible to place the force, depending on the circumstances, into the service of one or the other attribute of human nature. Integration processes in political, economic, military and other areas, significantly contributed to changing the role of a national state in its formerly inviolable spheres, even in those elements that are considered classic attributes of the state as an institution (sovereignty, independence, monetary policy, defense, state power legitimacy, etc). Does this power, which is 'taken away' from the national state, go away, through integrative processes with other international subjects, to some distant power and alienated centers, or does it, on the contrary, enter the corpus of political activity that strengthens its overall position? Without immersing into more profound analysis about what is closer to the truth, it is a fact that through integrative processes a number of 'state' activities is transferred to joint institutions. In the spirit of this paper, the most important institutions are those which decide about organization, preparing, functioning, and using of the state (interstate) power. Strategic solutions concerning these matters, are a part of domestic and intergovernmental policy. They are products of a great number of internal and external factors, starting from economic and institutional, to social and cultural-traditional, and to international.

The ultimate goal of game theory is to provide a theoretical model for strategic situations' analysis, i.e. for situations where one actor's choice depends on the behavior of other players in the game. As a concept, game theory is also applicable to the legal context. Legal dialectics and processes are often conducted in some form of strategic interactions. Game theory is a way to see how legal rules affect particular actors' behavior. International Economic Law has its own dynamics which makes the process similar to the analysis through the game theoretical tools. Therefore, the rules of international law are considered as the rules of the game that are taking place among different actors. Game theoretical considerations clarify the substance of the interaction and cooperation of players involved (states, international organizations and other actors). Game theory provides a basis for normative analysis of the issue of implementation of the rules of international law and improves understanding of those rules. The topic of the paper is the application of the game theory in the context of the legal framework established by the World Trade Organization. The member states' dilemma between using the advantages and liberalization options provided by the WTO on the one hand, and joining the regional trade agreements, on the other one, is strategic by nature. Therefore, game theory can contribute to understanding and resolving, using the game of 'prisoner's dilemma' as a model. It is the game which clearly shows that a group of rational egoists can end up worse than a group of actors that acts prima facie contrary to their own interests. 'Prisoner's dilemma' demonstrates why society and law has the need for coordination as well as mechanisms for co-operation. WTO member states put emphasis on the process of liberalization conducted in the framework of regional trade agreements (RTAs); at the same time, their participation in WTO negotiations is not effective and efficient enough to make a breakthrough in the multilateral framework. A solution of the game for Member States is not to cooperate: i. e, liberalization is primarily achieved through regional agreements rather than within the WTO. The rational decision of the Member States (opting for a regional approach) has resulted in a suboptimal result, which is a basic characteristic of the game model based on a prisoner's dilemma: in this case, the optimal solution would be cooperation through a multilateral framework (World Trade Organization).

"In this work, one of Latin America's most renowned legal philosophers conducts a comprehensive survey of the ancient Greek understanding of the law, drawing on texts by poets (Hesiod), philosophers (Anaximander), playwrights (Aeschylus and Sophocles), and historians (Herodotus and Thucydides). The book ends with a finely detailed analysis of the relationship between language and reality in Aristotle, and the emergence of the notion of the system and its subsequent introduction into Roman law. The author's in-depth study of all these aspects makes this volume an essential reference for philosophers, jurists, and historians"--

Европска унија представља по много чему специфичну међународну организацију. Њено основно и препознатљиво обележје је наднационалност у креирању и спровођењу јавних политика. Настала удруживањем ресурса угља и челика брзо је прерасла у зону слободне трговине и сарадњу држава чланица у питањима као што је атомска енергије. Европска интеграција од свог почетка до данас зна искључиво за проширење чланства и повећање броја области сарадње на добровољној основи. Да ли ће међународне околности у којима се ЕУ налази данас и односи са другим међународним организацијама одбрамбеног карактера допринети већој интеграцији држава чланица ЕУ у домену одбране основна је тема овог рада. Трагање за различитим сценаријима развоја заједничке безбедносне политике ЕУ зависи пре свега од међународне институционалне и безбедносне архитектуре у Европи и свету, историјско политичких трендова у развоју европске интеграције, правног оквира ЕУ и међународног стратегијског окружења. Савремене међународне организације, посебно оне са преовлађујућим обележјима наднационалности (у конкретном случају ЕУ) имају тенденцију да у области одбране и безбедности комбинују наднационална обележја са међувладиним у покушају да што ефективније искористе структуру организације за остваривање њених циљева и интереса, али без већег преноса надлежности са држава чланица на саму организацију. ; The European Union represents in many ways a specific international organization. Its basic and recognizable feature is that of supranational policy and decision making. It was created by pooling the resources of coal and steel which had quickly developed into a free trade zone and ever closer Union in many policy areas. European integration from its inception to the present days was all about expanding membership and increasing the number of areas of cooperation. Namely widening and deepening of the EU was on the agenda. Will the current international circumstances and relations with other international defense organizations contribute to deepening integration in the field of defense is to be researched in this work. Search for different scenarios in the development of EU Common Security and Defense policy depends primarily on the international institutional and security architecture in Europe and the world, the historical political trends in the development of European integration, the EU legal framework and international strategic environment. Contemporary international organizations, especially those with the prevailing supranational characteristics (in this case the EU) tend to combine intergovernmental and supranational approach in the area of defense and security in an effort to more effectively utilize the structure of the organization for the realization of its goals and interests, but without significant transfer of powers from Member States on the organization itself. The main goals and interests of the EU integration in the field of defense and security are to (1) ensure durable and everlasting peace among member states, (2) to address common security challenges, risks and threats autonomously or in cooperation with other States and/or international organizations, (3) pool and share resources leading to more effective achievement of military economic interests, mainly through the development and transfer of military technology and equipment. In addition to the mentioned goals and interests, (4) particular interests of the Member States would be to improve their own political, economic and military performance. EU Integration in the field of defense, may rest in the future on (1) the current state of integration (status quo), (2) progress in areas that are not conflicting with the individual interests of key actors in the European arena (3) the deepening of integration leading to progressive framing of common defense policy with an ultimate goal to establish common defense. (4) The fourth model is possible and has been seen in the other EU policy areas.

Emiliano J. Buis examines the sources of classical Greece to challenge both the state-centeredness of mainstream international legal history and the omnipresence of war and excessive violence in ancient times. Making ample use of epigraphic as well as literary, rhetorical, and historiographical sources, the book offers the first widespread account of the narrative foundations of the (il)legality of warfare in the classical Hellenic world. In a clear yet sophisticated manner, Buis convincingly proves that the traditionally neglected study of the performance of ancient Greek poleis can contribute to a better historical understanding of those principles of international law underlying the practices and applicable rules on the use of force and the conduct of hostilities

In this paper the author points out to the importance of main organizations for establishing of international peace and security. They are the following: League of Nations, United Nations, Organizations of European Security and Co-operation, Conference of European Security and Co-operation, European Council, West European Union and NATO. Until the end of the Cold war, the universal organizations have played primordial role, but after the mentioned period the regional ones took the lead. The reason lies in the shift in balance of power - from bipolar to unipolar. The League of Nations and CESC can be observed from the historic perspective. NATO and UN played a crucial role during the internationalization of Kosovo issue and the act of intervention itself. NATO demonstrated its power and proved in the absence of real balance of power, la force l'emporte sur le droit. On the other hand, UN had passed several resolutions that condemned violence in Kosovo and Metohia (1160, 1199 and 1203 - all passed in 1998). During 1999 Security Council had passed a famous Resolution 1244, by which it was decided a civic and military mission should be established in Kosovo and Metohia - UNMIK and KFOR KFOR dealt with security issues in order to ensure the respect of it to all nationalities in Kosovo and Metohia. UNMIK set a very ambitious task lying ahead trying to establish standards before the future status. Realizing that it would be impossible to reach the standards, UNMIK started with the policy of status determination without standards establishing. The outcome of such policy is Ahtissari's Plan for supervised Independence of Kosovo, and finally the Declaration of Self-proclaimed Independence of Kosovo. We are also witnessing the transfer of horizontal and vertical effective state authorizations to the mentioned international organizations, bearing in mind problems it encounters. NATO deals with security issues, but European Union being unable to deal with such tasks (ESDP policy is to be as attempt), is more concentrated on economic issues.