Suchergebnisse

CBO projection and SPF mean forecast diverge, by nearly a percentage point in 2024. Figure 1: Ten year Treasury yield (black), projected by CBO (tan), SPF mean (blue), TIPS ten year (red), all in %. NBER peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: Treasury via FRED, CBO, Philadelphia Fed, NBER. CBO's projection is based on current […]

Emphasis on Soviet relations with Rumania, Hungary, and East Germany.

AbstractTraditional ideas about the private nature of the international legal order are increasingly being forced to contend with the development of public legal elements at the international level. The notion of the international community interest is key to understanding these developments and, as such, has transformed our understanding of international law. There are many different approaches to the public/private distinction in law, broadly categorised into relational, public authority, and interest-based approaches. These can be reduced to four key elements of publicness: the existence of a community or public; the universality of the public regime in question with its own boundaries; normative and institutional hierarchies; the objectivity of obligation and responsibility. The development of the community interest and related norms of international law can be seen to have introduced and strengthened all of these elements of publicness within the international legal system. It is thus on its way to becoming an international public legal order. This has important implications for our understanding of international law and the future development of the international legal order.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Introduction -- Part 1: International Law -- 1. The Rocky Shoals of International Law -- 2. International Law versus the American Constitution -- 3. International Crime and Punishment -- 4. The Limits of "International Law" -- 5. International Law and the Use of Force -- Part 2: International Institutions and Global Order -- 6. After Guantanamo: The War Over the Geneva Convention -- 7. Seven Tests: Between Concert and Unilateralism -- 8. American Sovereignty and the UN -- 9. Courting Danger: What's Wrong with the International Criminal Court -- 10. Dayton, Bosnia, and the Limits of Law -- 11. Retail Diplomacy: The Edifying Story of UN Dues Reform -- 12. Fixing the United Nations -- Part 3: Law Enforcement and Foreign Policy -- 13. Law in Order: Reconstructing U. S. National Security -- 14. The Law at War: How Osama Slipped Away -- 15. The Reach of American Law -- 16. Law in the Service of Terror -- Part 4: The Debate Over Human Rights -- 17. Human Nature and Human Rights -- 18. Natural Rights and Human History -- 19. The Ground and Nature of Human Rights -- 20. What Price Human Rights? -- 21. "Exporting Democracy"-and Getting It Wrong -- 22. The Idea of Human Rights -- 23. "Human Rights": The Hidden Agenda

The traditional, bilateralist model no longer accurately describes modern international law. Despite this, we have lack a theoretical underpinning through which to understand the new international legal order. We are in need of a new paradigm. The notion of international community interest can provide this tool. Transcending the individual interests of states, it attaches instead to a shared system of values, such as the protection of human dignity and the global environment. This shift, from individual interest to community, underlies fundamental structural changes in international law. The first category of such changes relates to international law-making. Community interest-inspired obligations (e.g. to respect human rights) break with the traditional model in that they are not owed between states bilaterally. They thus institute an evolution in the nature of international legal obligations, from relative to absolute. Methods of law-making reflect this, becoming increasingly cooperative and legislative. Simultaneously, jus cogens limits the law-making power of states where it conflicts with fundamental community interests. The second category relates to the legal response to international law-breaking. The community interest in legal compliance underlies the shift from a subjective conception of 'responsibility as reparation', to an objective responsibility focused on the return to legality. Further, the community interest in the enforcement of particular rules underpins the newly differentiated regime of responsibility for serious breaches of peremptory norms, and the restructuring of the invocation of responsibility with regard to obligations erga omnes. We turn finally to international law-framing. The 'international community' provides the frame within which international law can be seen as a system within which states act, rather than merely threads of obligation and responsibility binding them in bilateral pairings. The recognition of commonality through the community interest is thus transformative, establishing a new paradigm through which we may understand international law.