Suchergebnisse

"Crime: The Illicit Global Political Economy" published on by Oxford University Press.

The issue of whether war crimes should be considered as a moral, legal, or political category is addressed. It is initially contended that only "crimes against peace" should be considered war crimes since other traditional categories of war crimes (eg, violations of human rights) remain criminal in nature outside the context of war. Moreover, it is claimed that crimes against peace possess specific moral & legal difficulties since defeated parties are generally labeled war criminals. The tendency to equate military success in war with absolution from blame is subsequently questioned on moral & legal grounds; specifically, it is argued that prosecuting those who achieve military victory may infringe on a state's universal right to self-defense. Moreover, the capacity to bring charges of war crimes against parties regardless of the outcome of war is deemed problematic since such reasoning suggests that certain entities have a right to victory during war. Consequently, it is maintained that only aggressor states that are defeated during war can legitimately be prosecuted. It is concluded that prosecutions of parties accused of committing war crimes ultimately constitutes a political act. J. W. Parker

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