Historians have all but dispensed with a conventional chronology that marks the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) as the origin of a modern state-centric territorial sovereignty. Instead, they are accumulating evidence that, since at least the early nineteenth century, sovereignty stretches back to the imperial practice of intervention into polities elsewhere on humanitarian grounds. Imperial sovereignty was less uniform than imperial officials and cartographers asserted; instead, as Lauren Benton has argued, it was (and is) usually "more myth than reality, more a story that polities [told] about their own power than a definite quality that they possess[ed]". Then there is the increasing number of historical examples of nonnormative, quasi-invisible forms of extra-territoriality that shaped the global imperial political architecture of the late nineteenth century: from the remaining principalities of the Holy Roman empire, and the conceptually distinctive practices of the Habsburgs as they separated cultural sovereignty from political sovereignty within their imperial territory, to the European claims to commercial and municipal authority in the treaty ports that dotted China's seaboard and river system, carving out the spoils of war.
My subject today is "International Organizations and Customary International Law"--that is, the role of international organizations in relation to the formation and determination of rules of customary international law. Charney devoted a good part of his well-known article on "Universal International Law" to what he termed "contemporary international law-making." By that, he meant chiefly law-making within "international forums"--that is, within organs of international organizations and at international conferences. He starts the discussion from the somewhat heretical position that "[w]hile customary law is still created in the traditional way, that process has increasingly given way in recent years to a more structured method, especially in the case of important normative developments. Rather than state practice and "opinio juris," multilateral forums often play a central role in the creation and shaping of contemporary international law." Charney's conclusions, however, are perhaps not as radical as his premise. He acknowledged that "[s]ome may question the authority to legislate universally, even in the face of some dissent, because it appears to be inconsistent with the sovereignty and autonomy of states. Such apprehension is not unreasonable. The international legal system, however, will invoke this authority sparingly."
International trade and migration are two important dimensions of globalization. Although governments have been very willing to open their borders to trade, they have not been so liberal in their immigration policies. It has been suggested, however, that a causal positive link might exist between immigration and trade. Negotiations would provide a justification for our failure to adopt more liberal immigration laws. Whereas in an ideal world we might adopt more efficient laws, we currently live in a highly nonideal world in which other governments discriminate against our nationals (in their goods markets, service markets, labor markets, or capital markets). Given this reality, we may use costly policies as bargaining chips, offering to reform our protectionist policies in exchange for liberalizing reforms by other governments that discriminate against our nationals. Reforms implemented through a multilateral agreement would allow each participant to increase its national economic welfare while improving global economic welfare.
Is there an intersection between the application of Public International Law with the political conduction of international relations? Should International Law, International Order and International Rules be redefined? How can such an intersection be found? The investigation seeks to extrapolate new definitions and an International Law axiom by utilizing sundry approaches to the state of the question which is properly laid out as well as some terms defined previous to the discussion by utilizing "approaches." The investigation is carried out by using the Cartesian method or that of Descartes and followers and the formal and material logical structures. Eventually new definitions and an axiom by extrapolating analyses categories are laid out. Hence, approaches such as the "legalistic" one, the "natural law" one, the "religious," the "extra-legal" one, the "eclectic" one, the "effective" one and the "UN proposed" one are analyzed in-depth upon observing the experience and current factual situation even though noting that those approaches are neither mutually exclusive nor "pure," but representative as the examples supporting them show. The paper's bottom line is no other than zeroing in on one of the oldest of International Law's wounds: That of its effectiveness. But by pointing out various moot points and by reflecting on the different reality stages, one can conclude that the material mission of the law as well as the aims of international order are eventually attained. Nonetheless in concluding and setting out the axioms and new definitions, the existing political power within a democratic framework should not be overlooked as the praxis of International Law meets that of international power to form then a juxtaposition. So, regardless of some international instruments being deemed as substantial law, one has to ask whether what the international community calls "breaking of law," is rather a breaking of procedures or adjective mandates. ; ¿Existe un punto de equilibrio o balance entre lo que es la aplicación del derecho internacional público y el manejo político de las relaciones internacionales? ¿Deben los conceptos de Derecho Internacional, Orden Internacional y Reglas Internacionales ser redefinidos? ¿Cómo se puede encontrar un punto de equilibrio? Esta investigación busca la extrapolación de nuevas definiciones y de un axioma de Derecho Internacional utilizando para ello varias aproximaciones al estado de la cuestión que es presentada así como términos previamente definidos en forma anterior al inicio de la discusión que utiliza las denominadas "aproximaciones." La investigación se lleva a cabo usando el método cartesiano y las estructuras de la lógica formal y material. Al final, nuevas definiciones y un axioma son presentadas usando para ello distintas categorías de análisis. Así, "aproximaciones" como la "religiosa o teocrática," o la "extra-legal," o la "legalista," o la "efectiva," o la del "derecho natural," la "ecléctica," la del "deber ser" y finalmente la "efectiva" son analizadas en profundidad a través de la observación de la experiencia y la situación actual, aun cuando haciendo notar que dichas aproximaciones no son mutuamente excluyentes, no tampoco "puras," pero sí representativas como los ejemplos que las soportan muestran. La idea subyacente de la investigación no es otra que centrarse en uno de los temas más importantes del derecho internacional: su efectividad. Pero al señalar varios puntos de discusión y a través de la reflexión de los diferentes escenarios reales, se puede concluir que la misión material del derecho internacional al final se cumple. No obstante, al concluir y al trazar el axioma y nuevas definiciones, no puede olvidarse el poder político existente dentro de un marco democrático por cuanto la praxis del derecho internacional se encuentra con la del poder internacional para formar una intersección. De tal manera, que independientemente de que algunos instrumentos internacionales se tengan como norma sustantiva, debe preguntarse uno si lo que la comunidad internacional llama "violación del derecho" no es una pero de meras reglas adjetivas.
International business has always been intimately linked to the politics of the global economy. Expansion and investment strategies of business play a key role in de?ning the architecture of the global economy. The shifting dynamic of the global economy such as the emergence of fast growing economies in, for example, India, China, South Africa and Brazil can be partly explained by the emergence of new market players such as the India transnational car manufacturer Tata, as well as the adaptation of established international businesses in the West to the new market opportunities in the South and the East. Equally, the recent (and in places ongoing) economic crises of the West owes as much to the failures of international business — notably the banking and investment industry — as it does to the failures of government policy. At the same time the international political dimension to the global economy explains the regulatory forces which also determine the architecture of the global economy. The far reaching policy liberalization of international trade through international (namely the World Trade Organisation) and regional treaties and rule- making, and the global deregulation of the investment and ?nancial services sector of the global economy driven by the neoliberal policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have created economic risks and opportunities for international business by opening up and creating new markets. The strategies of nation states and international business determine the architecture of the global economy and create both economic crises and dynamic growth at one and the same time in the contemporary global economy. So it is that for much of the ?rst decade or so of the new century the West has endured an age of austerity brought on by sustained economic decline and high indebtedness. The once market dominant economies of the United States and West European economies are now struggling to reverse negative economic growth. By contrast large previously peripheral under- developed economies in Africa and Asia are enjoying remarkable and sustained growth rates and their exports and investments now fuel an overall growth in the global economy.
The establishment and maintenance of order—that is, of settled rules and arrangements that regulate actors' behavior—is central to politics at all levels, including the international level. Political order, after all, is a requisite for modern human existence. Given the priority of the problem of order, the most important questions that can be addressed in an introductory International Relations (IR) course are those that concern the sources, nature, and historical evolution of international order. But a survey of conventional introductory IR textbooks reveals that these questions are typically dealt with glancingly or ignored altogether. Thus a strong case can be made that conventional IR textbooks overlook a vital aspect of the subject they are intended to cover. This failure appears to arise from an effort by IR textbook authors to explain international politics in terms of timeless dynamics that exist apart from history. But excluding history as a source of explanation comes at a high cost. In effect, it prevents textbooks from adequately weighing the significance of the historically specific bargains that have provided the foundation for international order in modern times.
International audience ; The interactions between economics and security are complicated because economics and politics each have distinct logics, with different dynamics operating at independent speeds. The credit crisis is having a significant time-dependent impact on international security. States are forced to run budget deficits to maintain the balance of the financial system, while at the same time addressing oil and environmental issues. The alternative to global organisation by a dominant power is the creation of international public or non-governmental institutions. The moral imperative to maintain peace may be universally accepted, but a country's decision to participate is also based on national interest and the geostrategic dimension. The main strategic danger is that politicians, still preoccupied with national budgetary and financial crises, do not respond to potentially explosive international issues with the necessary speed and interest. ; Les interactions entre l'économie et la sécurité sont compliquées parce que l'économie et la politique ont chacune des logiques distinctes, avec des dynamiques différentes opérant à des vitesses indépendantes. La crise du crédit exerce des effets importants dé »calés dans le temps sur la sécurité internationale. Les Etats sont contraints d'engager un déficit budgétaire pour maintenir l'équilibre du système financier, tout en s'interrogeant sur les questions pétrolières et environnementales. L'alternative à l'organisation mondiale par une puissance dominante réside dans la création d'institutions internationales publiques ou non gouvernementales. L'impératif moral pour le maintien de la paix peut être universellement accepté mais la décision d'un pays de participer est aussi basée sur l'intérêt national et sur la dimension géostratégique. Le principal danger stratégique réside sans le fait que les hommes politiques, toujours préoccupés par les crises budgétaires et financières nationales, ne répondent pas aux questions internationales potentiellement explosives ...
Der Klimawandel birgt globale Risiken. Dies ist weithin anerkannt. Umstritten ist die Frage, wie diesen Gefahren zu begegnen ist. 14 Jahre nach Kyoto ist klar: Klimapolitik ist Interessenpolitik. Das zeigte zuletzt die UN-Klimakonferenz 2011 in Durban mit ihren unverbindlichen Ergebnissen. In diesem Sammelband analysieren Experten Ursachen für das Scheitern der vergangenen Klima-Konferenzen und Konsequenzen für die künftige Klimapolitik. Insbesondere geht es um die Politik der Akteure China und Indien, um die Rolle der NGOs und die Klimafrage in der Entwicklungspolitik. Zugleich wird die deutsche Klimapolitik diskutiert und die Politik Brandenburgs von der verantwortlichen Ministerin vorgestellt.
This study is an exploration of the logic of hegemony in one of the most significant policy areas of international relations: international security. I argue that despite huge international opposition during the Court's early years of existence as well as the fact that 3 out of 5 permanent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) members are not Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, UNSC decision-making between 2002 and 2010 was framed by the hegemonic Justice discourse. The result of intense lobbying by international criminal law experts, NGO human rights activists, policymakers, journalists, and state representatives acting within the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court Assembly of States Parties and the media, Justice was the new ideology of international security. In order to empirically analyze this process of hegemonization, I developed a hermeneutic conceptual framework based on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's Poststructuralist Discourse Theory (PDT) and an inductive qualitative research strategy that can be applied to concrete international policy discourses. I defined hegemony as a process of hegemonization that takes place under specific historical circumstances in a particular international policy area. In order to reveal its workings I relied on a comprehensive list of PDT concepts operationalized as meso-level Discursive Mechanisms. Through the linking of various political demands, the creation of a collective identity, the gripping of the floating signifiers "Peace", "Security", "Sovereingty", "Protection", "Accountability", and "Rule of Law", and institution of a new political imaginary, Justice became one of the most successful discourses in early 21st century international relations. The new security ideology withstood challenges from three major counterdiscourses: the homegrown American version of "Politicization", the African Union's institutional discourse, and the ongoing normative attack from the loose network of actors defending ...
The 1st and 2nd Additional Protocols introduced a new rule which prohibits attacks against works and installations containing dangerous forces, even if they represent military objectives, because those dangerous forces could have a negative impact on civilians. It is not very sure that these rules became a part of the customary law, but practice shows that states are aware of the considerable risks which would emerge. As a consequence, states recognize that, in any armed conflict, it is necessary to take special precautionsin order to avoid releasing these dangerous forces and not cause any threats among civilians. According to the two protocols, this requirement of taking precautions is applicable to any kind of armed conflict.Keywords: customary international law; international conflicts; noninternational conflicts; Additional Protocols to the Geneva Convention.
Seit den 1990er Jahren nimmt die Bedeutung von Nichtregierungsorganisationen im Umweltvölkerrecht stetig zu. In Anbetracht der Vielzahl an grenzüberschreitenden Umweltproblemen, mit denen sich die Staatengemeinschaft konfrontiert sieht, erscheint eine Zunahme an Umweltschutz-NGOs geradezu als logische Konsequenz. Diese Arbeit hat sich zum Ziel gesetzt, die rechtlichen Grundlagen einer Beteiligung von Umwelt-NGOs, vorwiegend auf internationaler Ebene, darzustellen. Deshalb erfolgt zuerst eine Definition und Erklärung der essentialen Begriffe, um dann eine Kategorisierung von NGOs vorzunehmen. In einem nächsten Schritt werden zwei international agierende Umwelt-NGOs, Greenpeace und der WWF, ausführlich untersucht. Weiter folgt eine Analyse der Stellung von nichtstaatlichen Umweltschutzorganisationen im internationalen System der Vereinten Nationen (VN) und der Europäischen Union (EU). Abschließend wird die Rolle von NGOs bei der Entstehung und der Durchsetzung von internationalem Umweltrecht ermittelt, mit Fokus auf das Internationale Übereinkommen zur Regelung des Walfangs und auf das Übereinkommen über den Zugang zu Informationen, die Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung an Entscheidungsverfahren und den Zugang zu Gerichten in Umweltangelegenheiten. Nach eingehender Untersuchung lässt sich feststellen, dass wichtige Sonderorganisationen der VN gesetzliche Grundlagen geschaffen haben, damit sich Umwelt-NGOs in dieses System einbringen können. Anders verhält es sich hingegen bei der EU, wo Umweltschutzorganisationen keinen formellen Zugang zu den Organen haben. Auch die Partizipationsmöglichkeiten von NGOs bei internationalen Umweltabkommen sind divergent. Diese sind abhängig vom jeweiligen Vertrag und der Phase in der versucht wird Einfluss zu nehmen. Abzuwarten bleibt, ob in Zukunft der Rechtsstatus von NGOs allgemein verbindlich verankert wird. ; Since the 1990s, the significance of environmental NGOs is steadily increasing. Due to the increase of global environmental challenges, affecting not only single countries but also the international community, this development seems logical. The aim of this thesis is to examine the legal basis of the participation of environmental NGOs with an international focus.Firstly, the author defines and explains essential notions in order to categorize NGOs. Secondly, the two cases of Greenpeace and WWF are analyzed, followed by the study of the legal status of non-state environmental organizations in the international systems of the United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU). Finally, the role of NGOs in the formation and implementation process of international environmental law is examined with the cases of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling and the Aarhus Convention. The analysis shows, that important organizations of the UN provide a legal basis for participation of environmental NGOs in the law-making and implementation processes. On the contrary in case of the EU, the findings show that environmental NGOs dont have formal access to the significant law-making institutions. In addition, the findings show that participation possibilities for NGOs in international environmental treaties are divergent and depend on the individual contract and the phase, in which NGOs want to have influence on the treaty. For future development in this field of study, it will be interesting to see whether environmental NGOs will be granted a legally binding status. ; vorgelegt von Agnes Gruber ; Abweichender Titel laut Übersetzung des Verfassers/der Verfasserin ; Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Diplomarbeit, 2018 ; (VLID)2581372
The growth in international law is not just a matter of an ever-increasing number of treaties. There has also been a considerable growth in what is known as "customary international law" being the writings of scholars, principles of international law that grow out of the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals, and the writings of international organizations themselves. Like all forms of law, international law is susceptible to interminable growth. Unlike other branches of law, it is not subject to any democratic check. It is driven by academics, pressure groups, and international organizations, international political institutions who have every interest in there being ever more international law with which to sustain them. The lingering concern is that the growth of international law absorbs money and time, without being developed in the context of a proper policy debate. International law is far more than the signature of treaties between states that see mutual advantage in cooperation. It purports to be a global order of moral principles regulating the conduct of states. Yet states have far more economic and military power than the institutions that administer international law, which calls into question the notion that international law can ever change the balance of power. A curious confluence of interests between states and international organizations means that international law can grow ever more, but persists in having remarkably little effect upon the underlying dynamics of international relations.
Cet article a pour objectif de proposer une étude sur le concept de gouvernance internationale. Ce dernier fait partie de nouveaux paradigmes utilisés en politique internationale dans le cadre de la mondialisation des droits de l'homme et de la démocratie. Dans un premier temps, nous étudions le terme de gouvernance et ses nuances avec le terme de gouvernement. Dans un deuxième temps, nous nous penchons sur l'usage du concept de gouvernance internationale. Enfin, dans un troisième temps, nous évoquons la question de savoir comment concevoir une bonne gouvernance internationale.
In retrospect, significant parallels can be drawn between the International Year of Languages 2008, which was initiated by the United Nations General Assembly and was coordinated by UNESCO, and the European Year of Languages 2001, which was a joint initiative of the Council of Europe and the European Union. In both cases 'the Year' passed with little public notice, and ended with the insight that a shared interest in languages by no means goes hand in hand with common views on language policy. Moreover, the status in the education systems of mother tongues on the one hand and foreign languages or trans-regional linguae francae on the other was discussed intensely in both instances. Against the background of the current debate on the influence of international educational organisations on national educational systems and concepts, the present article asks whether UNESCO has a specific role to play in the area of language education, and what (eurocentrically determined) blindspots in language education concepts become visible when one looks beyond the borders of Europe.
Envisioning an international public order means envisioning an order sustained by a legal and institutional framework that ensures effective collective action with a view to defending fundamental values of the international community and to solving common global problems, in line with the universalist vision of international law. Envisioning the construction of an international public order means considering that this framework, which embraces and promotes the respect for human rights focused particularly on human dignity, is consolidating and evolving based on the International Criminal Court (ICC). The establishment of the ICC added an international punitive perennial facet to international humanitarian law and international human rights law and linked justice to peace, to security and to the well-being of the world, reaffirming the principles and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations (UN). Nevertheless, the affirmation process of an international criminal justice by punishing those responsible for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, faces numerous obstacles of political and normative character. This article identifies the central merits of the Rome Statute and ICC's practice and indicates its limitations caused by underlying legal-political tensions and interpretive questions relating to the crime of aggression and crimes against humanity. Finally, the article argues for the indispensability of rethinking the jurisdiction of the ICC, defending the categorization of terrorism as an international crime, and of articulating its mission with the "responsibility to protect", which may contribute to the consolidation of the ICC and of international criminal law and reinforce its role in the construction of an effective international public order.