Suchergebnisse

The influence of feminist perspectives upon contemporary international relations scholarship is investigated; specific attention is directed toward analyzing the various points of contention between feminist & mainstream international relations scholars. The origins of feminist international relations theory are documented, emphasizing the emergence of feminist challenges to mainstream (ie, neo-realist & neo-liberal institutional) perspectives & the specific contributions of feminist approaches to international relations (eg, illuminating the various ways in which gender played a role in creating political spaces & constructing identities). After highlighting the central characteristics of the feminist perspective, especially its eventual turn toward standpoint feminism, multiple pieces of mainstream international relations scholarship that critiqued feminist international relations research, eg, Adam Jones's (1996) assertion that men & masculinity were overlooked by feminist international relations work, are reviewed to determine whether such criticism is indeed justified. Sundry difficulties with these mainstream critiques of feminist international relations theory are noted; in addition, it is argued that feminist approaches have facilitated attempts to overcome troubling dichotomies within the international relations field. The extent to which feminist perspectives will influence future international relations research is also contemplated. 87 References. J. W. Parker

THE FOUR GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 12 AUGUST 1949 AND THEIR TWO ADDITIONAL PROTOCOLS OF 1977 ARE TREATIES AIMING TO PROTECT VICTIMS IN TIME OF ARMED CONFLICT. TO ENSURE THEY SHOULD BENEFIT THESE VICTIMS, THE DRAFTERS DEFINED SIMPLE CONDITIONS OF APPLICATION RESTING ON FACTS, AND THEY PROVIDED FOR AN AUTOMATIC APPLICATION OF THESE TREATIES RATHER THAN LETTING THEIR APPLICATION DEPEND ON THE FREE INTERPRETATION OF THE PARTIES. THE LEVEL OF PROTECTION PROVIDED DEPENDS ON WHETHER IT IS A CONFLICT OF AN INTERNAL, HIGH-INTENSITY INTERNAL OR INTERNATIONAL NATURE. A CERTAIN MARGIN OF INTERPRETATION WILL SUBSIST FOR THE DETERMINATION OF AN INTERNAL CONFLICT BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTIES OF FIXING EXACT CRITERIA. AS THE OUTBREAK OF A CONFLICT NORMALLY TAKES PLACE IN A VERY SENSITIVE POLITICAL CONTEXT, STATES MAY BE INCLINED TO DENY THE EXISTENCE OF SITUATIONS LEADING TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THESE TREATIES AND AS A CONSEQUENCE NOT APPLY THEM AS SUCH. ALTHOUGH STATES MAY PRAGMATICALLY RESPECT THE CONTENT OF THESE TREATIES IN PART OF IN WHOLE, THE ORIGIN OF MANY OF THESE VIOLATIONS CAN BE FOUND IN THIS DENIAL OF APPLICABILITY. AS THERE IS NO SUPRANATIONAL JURISDICTION, RESPECT FOR THESE FUNDAMENTAL RULES PROTECTING THE HUMAN BEING MUST BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH A STRONGER SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PART OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.

History and capabilities of military counterterrorism units, methods of employing them outside the US, and benefits of prosecuting terrorists apprehended by such units under international law. Potential missions include improving security of US diplomatic and military installations overseas, preemptive strikes, hostage rescue, and capturing terrorists.

"The book serves as a companion to three other volumes published by Cambridge University Press, dealing respectively with the jus ad bellum, the law of belligerent occupation and non-international armed conflicts. It is devoted to the core of the jus in bello - that is, the conduct of hostilities on land, at sea and in the air in inter-State armed conflicts - analysed against the background of customary international law and treaties in force. The book deals with both means and methods of modern warfare. It addresses issues of general non-combatant protection, the principle of proportionality in collateral damage to civilians and special protection, especially of the environment and cultural property. It also considers the relevant dimensions of international criminal law and deals with controversial matters such as unlawful combatancy, direct participation of civilians in hostilities and the use of 'human shields'. Case law and legal literature are cited throughout"--

Emerging technologies have always played an important role in armed conflict. From the crossbow to cyber capabilities, technology that could be weaponized to create an advantage over an adversary has inevitably found its way into military arsenals for use in armed conflict. The weaponization of emerging technologies, however, raises challenging legal issues with respect to the law of armed conflict. As States continue to develop and exploit new technologies, how will the law of armed conflict address the use of these technologies on the battlefield? Is existing law sufficient to regulate new technologies, such as cyber capabilities, autonomous weapons systems, and artificial intelligence? Have emerging technologies fundamentally altered the way we should understand concepts such as law-of-war precautions and the principle of distinction? How can we ensure compliance and accountability in light of technological advancement? This volume of the Lieber Studies explores these critical questions while highlighting the legal challenges - and opportunities - presented by the use of emerging technologies on the battlefield.