|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
商品の説明
内容説明
The question of the legality of humanitarian intervention is, at first blush, a simple one. The Charter of the United Nations clearly prohibits the use of force, with the only exceptions being self-defence and enforcement actions authorized by the Security Council. There are, however, long-standing arguments that a right of unilateral intervention pre-existed the Charter. This book, which won the ASIL Certificate of Merit in 2002, begins with an examination of the genealogy of that right, and arguments that it might have survived the passage of the Charter, either through a loophole in Article 2(4) or as part of customary international law. It has also been argued that certain `illegitimate' regimes lose the attributes of sovereignty and thereby the protection given by the prohibition of the use of force. None of these arguments is found to have merit, either in principle or in the practice of states. A common justification for a right of unilateral humanitarian intervention concerns the failure of the collective security mechanism created after the Second World War. Chapters 4 and 5, therefore, examine Security Council activism in the 1990s, notable for the plasticity of the circumstances in which the Council was prepared to assert its primary responsibility for international peace and security, and the contingency of its actions on the willingness of states to carry them out. This reduction of the Council's role from substantive to formal partly explains the recourse to unilateralism in that decade, most spectacularly in relation to the situation in Kosovo. Crucially, the book argues that such unilateral enforcement is not a substitute for but the opposite of collective action. Though often presented as the only alternative to inaction, incorporating a `right' of intervention would lead to more such interventions being undertaken in bad faith, it would be incoherent as a principle, and it would be inimical to the emergence of an international rule of law.
Book Description
This book asks whether states have the right to intervene in foreign civil conflicts for humanitarian reasons. The UN Charter prohibits state aggression, but many argue that such a right exists as an exception to this rule. Offering a thorough analysis of this issue, the book puts NATO's action in Kosovo in its proper legal perspective.
登録情報
|
この本のなか見！検索より
（詳細はこちら）
この商品にタグをつける(詳細)タグは、商品との関連性が非常に強いキーワードまたはラベルのようなものです。
タグにより、すべてのお客様がお気に入りの商品の整理と確認を行うことができます。 ※タグは初期設定で公開になっています。詳しくはこちら |
カスタマーレビュー
Amazon.com で最も参考になったカスタマーレビュー (beta)
Amazon.com:
4件のカスタマーレビュー
7 人中、7人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
tightly argued and complex ... riveting
2001/10/31
形式:ハードカバー
'a tightly argued and complex presentation, with numbered, easily referenced topics in the style of a doctoral thesis (which it is). A more textured work [than Christine Gray's International Law and the Use of Force], it is arguably a more interesting read for an audience that does not already have at ready access the historical background or international law perspective to this difficult subject. It is also a more accessible work for students, and decidedly less dry and fragmented than many standard international law texts ... Dr Chesterman gives us a fairly riveting review of the history behind the modern rise of humanitarian intervention.' -Books-on-Law
7 人中、5人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
Humanitarian intervention or inhumanitarian nonintervention?
2001/7/8
形式:ハードカバー
From the author: This book critically examines the right of humanitarian intervention, asserted most spectacularly by NATO during its 1999 air strikes over Kosovo. The UN Charter prohibits the unilateral use of force, but there have long been arguments that such a right might exist as an exception to this rule, or linked to the changing role of the Security Council. Through an analysis of these questions, the book puts NATO's action in Kosovo in its proper legal and historical perspective.
6 人中、4人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
a tour de force
2001/10/31
形式:ハードカバー
'Chesterman has written a tour de force that exposes the weaknesses of the arguments supporting a doctrine of unilateral humanitarian intervention in international society ... Chesterman rejects the claim that states have a legal right to act as vigilantes in support of Council resolutions, even if they believe that this is the only means to stop a genocide. The powerfully argued thesis of this scholarly work is that accepting this proposition in law is "a recipe for bad policy, bad law, and a bad international order".' -International Affairs
これらのレビューは参考になりましたか？
ご意見はクチコミでお聞かせください。
リストマニア
関連商品を探す
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Current Events > War & Peace
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Law
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Politics
- 洋書 > Professional & Technical > Law > Constitutional Law
- 洋書 > Professional & Technical > Law > International Law
- 洋書 > Reference > Law
- 洋書 > Special Features > all foreign books
同じキーワードの商品を探す
フィードバック
- カタログ情報、または画像について報告
- 著者からのコメント
- 出版社からのコメント
|
