Suchergebnisse

"Formed in 1947, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) was the first postwar international organization dedicated to cooperation in Europe along the boundaries set by the Cold War. Linking the universalism of the UN to European regionalism, both Cold War superpowers, the USA and the Soviet Union, were founding members of the UNECE. This book provides a unique study of this important but hitherto under-researched international organization. Incorporating research on the Cold War, the history of internationalism and European integration, Stinsky weaves these different threads of historical enquiry into a single analytical narrative. Building on the League of Nations' difficult heritage, and in an increasingly challenging political environment, the UNECE's mission was to facilitate European cooperation across the Iron Curtain. With a number of competitor organizations set against it, the UNECE managed to carve out a niche for itself, setting norms and standards that still have an impact on the everyday lives of millions in Europe and beyond today. Working against an overwhelming geopolitical trend, UNECE succeeded in bridging the Cold War divide on several occasions, and maintained a broad system of contacts across the Iron Curtain."

In this article, we argue that the lack of attention paid to the scopic regimes of modernity in the 'visual turn' literature misses a key aspect of how visuality produces and shapes the international as both a site — and sight — of politics. In making the case that systemised ways of seeing are central to world politics, we contend that the scopic regimes of modernity help us to understand how it becomes possible for particular representational practices and outputs to resonate within broader discourses as authoritative, truthful, and/or emotively powerful. To do so, we draw from ongoing controversies over targeted killing via drones. We argue that disagreements over the legality and governance of drone warfare are more than disputes over legal statutes and legitimate techniques for the application of kinetic force; they also encompass disagreements over how we see, who we see, what we see, and what counts as being seen. Thus, by demonstrating the importance of scopic regimes, we provide evidence of the value of engaging with how the visual produces the political in International Relations. Moreover, we argue for International Relations to engage with scopic regimes from beyond Western traditions in order to decolonise the 'visual turn'.

Abstract
Are the trade philosophies behind the EU internal market and the WTO international market converging or diverging; and are we, or are we not, moving towards a 'common law of international trade'? Twenty years ago, an interesting—and swiftly famous—answer to this question was given by Joseph H.H. Weiler. Studying the 'constitution of the common market', the historical evolution of free movement law is here divided into five periods or generations. The underlying Weiler thesis is thereby as simple as it is beautiful: starting with an early radical philosophy in Dassonville, the European Union has gradually and consistently moved away from its original hyper-liberal approach towards an ever more deferential approach; and the transformation of Article 34 TFEU into a discrimination format ultimately leads to a convergence with international law. What are the empirical and normative credentials of this stylised construction of the internal market? This article argues that there are fundamental shortcomings in this standard interpretation of the evolution of the internal market, and that a historical reconstruction arrives at a very different empirical and normative picture. What can this 'revisionist' result mean for EU law scholarship in general? If EU constitutionalism wishes to 're-constitute' its object of study properly, it needs to abandon the abstract ways of philosophizing that have become commonplace in the last 25 years. Part and parcel of this methodological renaissance must be a renewed commitment to test (constitutional) theory against (judicial) practice.

Are the trade philosophies behind the EU internal market and the WTO international market converging or diverging; and are we, or are we not, moving towards a "common law of international trade"? Twenty years ago, an interesting and – and swiftly famous – answer to this question was given by Joseph H.H. Weiler. Studying the "constitution of the common market", the historical evolution of free movement law is here divided into five periods or generations. The underlying Weiler thesis is thereby as simple as it is beautiful: starting with an early radical philosophy in Dassonville, the European Union has gradually and consistently moved away from its original hyper-liberal approach towards an ever more deferential approach; and the transformation of Article 34 TFEU into a discrimination format ultimately leads to a convergence with international law. What are the empirical and normative credentials of this stylised construction of the internal market? This Working Paper argues that there are fundamental shortcomings in this standard interpretation of the evolution of the internal market, and that a historical reconstruction arrives at a very different empirical and normative picture. What can this "revisionist" result mean for EU law scholarship in general? If EU constitutionalism wishes to "re-constitute" its object of study properly, it needs to abandon the abstract ways of philosophising that have become commonplace in the last 25 years. Part and parcel of this methodological renaissance must be a renewed commitment to test (constitutional) theory against (judicial) practice.