Where collective security avenues are blocked, could a State, or States acting jointly, lawfully intervene militarily in another State’s territory without the permission of the Government of that State to halt or prevent it from committing atrocities against its own people? What about intervention where the territorial Government is unable or unwilling to provide basic humanitarian assistance to its people in the face of natural or human-made disaster?
The financial and economic events of the last few weeks have shocked many of us. Indeed, they have shocked us out of our complacency and made apparent the urgent need to reform the financial sector. But more than that, there is a sense that it may now be possible to seize this moment as an opportunity to go much further.
This essay argues that the war on terror that followed the 9/11 attacks on the United States is fundamentally misconceived and is actually achieving the opposite to what was intended. The architects of the war on terror have been chasing rainbows since 2001 as the harder they have run towards their goal, the further away it has seemed to move.
The recent events in the South Caucasus once again highlight the pervasive and destructive forces inherent in ethnic nationalism. These should not be misunderstood as simply local phenomena for they have wider ramifications and are shaped by factors well beyond their locale.
Twenty-first century counterterrorism is affecting key global norms and institutions. It forms part of a trend emerging in the international security agenda that seeks to alter existing structures, norms and institution to favour the objectives of powerful actors in the contemporary security environment.
In the west, China’s rise and increased attention to fundamentalist Islam have caused many to perceive a global contest in the export of values. At this particular crossroads of history there seem to be several very different maps for the future. In this context, many speak of the ‘decline of the west’, but what is it exactly?
Watching for signs of war with Iran, many of us probably took our eyes off other hot spots where President Bush’s imminent departure is a strategic consideration. Georgia’s Saakashvili launched his military action to regain control of South Ossetia, no doubt with the departure in mind and probably thinking America’s pro-war administration would back him. Yet his decision was unlawful and foolhardy.
The dilemmas surrounding international intervention into the domestic affairs of brutal regimes such as Burma or Zimbabwe are often discussed. Nevertheless, there is also room for the less-examined question of the legitimacy of international pressure in cases where the violating state is a liberal democracy. Should this influence the set of considerations that other democratic states take into account when they decide whether or not to interfere in their domestic affairs?
Processes of conflict management and resolution are not unlimited. They proceed in a distinct setting, a recognizable format. This article is about the interconnectedness between process and structure, flow and bedding, river and shore. Through an analysis of various boundaries in negotiation, this article considers the importance of the context for the process and its impact.
One of the hallmarks of totalitarian ideologues is the use of the big lie: a virulent attack on a defenseless group and then a categorical denial turning victims into executioners and executioners into victims. Professor Benny Morris practices the Big Lie.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.