Suchergebnisse

Much of the contemporary literature on the utility of international sanctions approaches the apparent riddle of why sanctions are embraced so eagerly when they are supposedly such an "ineffective" tool of statecraft by focusing on the instrumental and rational purposes of sanctions. As a result, one purpose that does not always lend itself to a rational means-end calculus—the purpose of punishment—tends to be overlooked or, more commonly, dismissed outright. This article explores punishment as both a useful and an effective purpose of international sanctions. It argues not only that sanctions should be distinguished from other forms of hurtful statecraft but also that they are a form of "international punishment" for wrongdoing, despite the difficulties of applying the term "punishment" in the context of international relations. The article then examines the purposes of punishment and reveals that only some are understandable when a model of means-end rationality is used, suggesting that the element of the nonrational also plays an important role in international sanctions. The argument is then applied to the case of U.S. sanctions imposed after the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan to demonstrate the different purposes of punishment at work in this case. The article concludes that just as we cannot understand punishment as a purposive human activity solely by reference to a rational model of a means to a clearly delineated end, so too we cannot entirely understand sanctions as a form of international punishment by an attachment to a rational model of policy behavior. However, some forms of punishment are exceedingly effective, and this may explain why sanctions continue to be a popular instrument of statecraft.

In a reeent work entitled The Psychology of Nations we are told that "International Law must be made intelligible to very young minds, and now that we are to have an international seat of congresses and courts, the interest must be made in its existence to give reality to the idea of internationalism." This admonition by a psychologist is illustrative of a widespread attitude toward international law; that it is a matter readily understood, for which there need be no specialized training, everyone being competent to pass judgment upon any subject about which international law is supposed to be concerned.

"International Cooperation Theory and International Institutions" published on by Oxford University Press.

"Nach wie vor steht der Kampf gegen den internationalen Terrorismus weit oben auf der Agenda der NATO. Der im November zu verabschiedenden neuen Strategie muss es gelingen, die Rolle von Streitkräften im Rahmen einer vernetzten Sicherheitsarchitektur zu bestimmen und den militärischen Beitrag für die Unterbindung des internationalen Terrorismus zu definieren. Eine Intensivierung des Dialogs mit Nicht-NATO-Staaten sowie die Harmonisierung mit wichtigen Akteuren, vorrangig der EU, im Sinne des Comprehensive Approach ist wünschenswert." (Autorenreferat)

Includes bibliographical references. ; With supplements. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Published 1922- by the Royal Institute of International Affairs (called Jan. 1922-Mar. 1926, British Institute of International Affairs); by the Oxford University Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs; by Butterworths for the Institute; in Oxford by Blackwell Publishers.