Suchergebnisse

Setting the stage -- Developing the 'value-based model' of self-defence -- The scholarly community's surprising neglect of values as self-defence decision-grounds -- The value-based model's answer to common theoretical ('hard case') questions -- Examining German law's treatment of self-defence from a value-centric perspective -- Examining the US law's treatment of self-defence from a value-centric perspective -- Examining the English law's treatment of self-defence from a value-centric perspective -- Parting observations.

In his address at West Point on June 1, 2002, President George W. Bush appeared to be signaling America's willingness to regard the mere possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by potential enemies as grounds for an anticipatory war. Historically, however, a clear distinction has been drawn between preemptive and preventive, or anticipatory, war, with the latter regarded as illegitimate. The National Security Strategy announced by the president on September 20, 2002, was more conventional in its approach to preemption, but doubts remain as to whether the old distinction can be preserved. And this discussion is taking place in the context of a specific problem, namely the apparent desire of Iraq to obtain WMD and the determination of the United States, and, less clearly expressed, the UN Security Council, to prevent this from happening.

Recent events in places like Kosovo and Georgia have put the spotlight on the international law of self-determination and secession. However, the definition of these concepts and the conditions for their application are unclear. This book sheds light on the meaning of self-determination and secession, with reference to four key post-Soviet regions.