Suchergebnisse

Cover; Half-title; Title; Copyright; Contents; Biography; Contributors; Foreword: There are men too gentle to live among wolves; Abbreviations; 1: Hilaire McCoubrey and international conflict and security law; 2: The development of operational law within Army Legal Services; 3: Reflections on the relationship between the duty to educate in humanitarian law and the absence of a defence of mistake of law in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; 4: Superior orders and the International Criminal Court; 5: Command responsibility: victors' justice or just desserts?

Border fixity - the proscription of foreign conquest and the annexation of homeland territory - has, since World War II, become a powerful norm in world politics. This development has been said to increase stability and peace in international relations. Yet, in a world in which it is unacceptable to challenge international borders by force, sociopolitically weak states remain a significant source of widespread conflict, war, and instability. In this book, Boaz Atzili argues that the process of state building has long been influenced by external territorial pressures and competition, wit.

This article demonstrates that the probability of an international crisis involving the United States declines as a presidential administration gains time in office. This finding invalidates three widely held theories about the relationship between the American democratic cycle and foreign policy that (1) there might be a honeymoon period immediately following election in which new presidents are unlikely to become involved in foreign crises, (2) presidents might systematically use the ``rally round the flag'' effect to bolster their electoral prospects, or that more generally, (3) foreign policy might be primarily tied to the democratic constraints of the electoral cycle. This finding also stands in partial contrast to recent work suggesting that, globally, leadership experience does not influence the likelihood of a militarized interstate dispute, while leader age does. The differing conclusions are the result of both the unique American case and the differing formulations of conflict.

The matter of role and influence of the United Nations in resolution of international conflicts is decisive because they demonstrate their legal presence at the national as well as international level. Throughout the paper, the authors insist on determination of resolution of international conflicts pursuant to Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. The basic hypothesis of the paper has been established on the premise by studying relevant provisions of 1945 Charter of the United Nations, 1949 Geneva Conventions and two additional protocols of 1977, United Nations resolutions, international treaties and international customary rules of war, it is possible to accurately determine the role, character and significance of the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations General Assembly in resolution of international conflicts. Furthermore, it is of interest to note that decisive significance for confirmation of the hypothesis lies with the objective image of the United Nations presented through mechanisms of the international law for resolution of armed conflicts. Furthermore, throughout the entire paper, the authors present international conflict resolution instruments as well as applicable legal consequences of effective resolution of the same, and ultimately, in the concluding considerations, they confirm that actions regarding resolution of armed conflicts are current, essential and timely.

International relations scholars agree that marked changes in the balance of power between states are among the most common causes of war. This book explains why such power shifts lead to war breaking out in some cases, but not in others.

Scrutinizes the international relations literatures surrounding three principal research movements that study international conflict: game theory, the democratic peace, & offense-defense theory. The development of the microfoundations of conflict, ie, crisis origins & escalation to war, in game theoretic models is examined; focus of this approach is on why actors fight when preferable peaceful settlements exist. The notion of the democratic peace centers on the observation that democracies are far less likely to war with one another than other dyads. Its establishment as stylized fact is considered before critiquing theories proposed to explain this phenomenon. Three additional approaches to explain the democratic peace are delineated, & a call is made for more hypotheses to test against the large-n sets typically analyzed as well as case studies. Offense-defense theory derives comes from the idea that war & conflict are more likely when territory is easily taken; case studies dominate this research field. Measurement of the offense-defense balance has proven problematic, & the two World Wars, key to the theory's development, are seen to pose a puzzle. Following a look at some test cases, a revision to the theory is proffered. It is contended that the democratic peace & offense-defense theory can benefit by employing game theory. J. Zendejas

Examines influence of behavior of domestic and international rival leaders on their foreign policy decision making; 1975-92, chiefly.