Suchergebnisse

Momentous events of recent years have shown the tremendous potential for developing and applying international law, even in the area that has always presented the greatest challenge to the rule of law – the use of force. The collaborative response by the United States, the Soviet Union, and other major powers to the Iraqi army's invasion and occupation of Kuwait showed unprecedented unity on the relevance of international law, its rules, and its enforceability through decisions of the UN Security Council. What explains this historic convergence of views? What differences remain about the legality of using armed force in the new international order that is emerging with the end of the Cold War? Law and Force in the New International Order offers a timely and comprehensive inquiry into the growing number of situations where the temptation or necessity to use military force confronts the tenets of international law. Distinguished American and Soviet legal scholars and practitioners explore the idea of the primacy of law over politics, the notion held by some that U.S. military force may be applied for the sake of democracy at a time when Moscow has rejected the Brezhnev Doctrine, the tension between collective security and collective self-defense during the Iraq-Kuwait crisis, and the prospects for the use of force being authorized by the United Nations and regional organizations. The contributors also examine the vexing legal issues raised by interventions to protect human rights, to overthrow "illegitimate" regimes, and to combat international terrorism and drug trafficking; the restraints on the use of force promised by new arms control agreements; and the future role of the World Court and other tribunals in preventing or settling disputes involving the threat or use of force. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1212/thumbnail.jpg

A growing international consensus supports the idea of holding individuals responsible for the most egregious violations of human rights such as genocide. This consensus lies behind the recent efforts to create an International Criminal Court (ICC). The United States, however, has refused to support the ICC, citing concerns that the Court may pose a threat to national security. This volume brings legal, historical, military, and political perspectives to an examination of U.S. concerns about the ICC. The contributors assess not only the potential national security risks that would be associate