Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
57 result(s) for "Roach, Steven C"
Sort by:
Decency and difference : humanity and the global challenge of identity politics
\"Decency remains one of the most prevalent yet least understood terms in today's political discourse. In evoking respect, kindness, courage, integrity, reason, and tolerance, it has long expressed an unquestioned duty and belief in promoting and protecting the dignity of all persons. Today this unquestioned belief is in crisis. Tribalism and identity politics have both hindered and threatened its moral stability and efficacy. Still, many continue to undertheorize its political character by isolating it from the effects of identity politics. Decency and Difference argues that decency is a primary source of the political tension that has long shaped the struggles for power, identity, and justice in the global arena. It distinguishes among basic, conservative, and liberal strands of decency to critically examine the many conflicting and competing applications of decency in global politics. Together these different stands reflect a long and uneven evolution from the British and American Empire to a global network of justice. By engaging the contradictions of the progressive and retrogressive qualities of decency and the role played by emotion and affect in driving these contradictions, the book exposes the propriety gaps of decency and the disparate ways that it is practiced in global politics. The book thus addresses the global challenge of reconciling different political proprieties and configuring a diverse political ethic of decency\"-- Provided by publisher.
Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare
2021 CHOICE Outstanding Academic Title Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare explores the complex relationship between just war theory and the ethics of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). One of the challenges facing ethicists of war, particularly just war theorists, is that AWS is an applicative concept that seems, in many ways, to lie beyond the human(ist) scope of the just war theory tradition. The book examines the various ethical gaps between just war theory and the legal and moral status of AWS, addresses the limits of both traditional and revisionist just war theory, and proposes ways of bridging some of these gaps. It adopts a dualistic notion of moral responsibility-or differing, related notions of moral responsibility and legitimate authority-to study the conflicts and contradictions of legitimizing the autonomous weapons that are designed to secure peace and neutralize the effects of violence. Focusing on the changing conditions and dynamics of accountability, responsibility, autonomy, and rights in twenty-first-century warfare, the volume sheds light on the effects of violence and the future ethics of modern warfare.
South Sudan: a volatile dynamic of accountability and peace
Since the warring parties to South Sudan's civil war (2013—15) signed a peace agreement in August 2015, South Sudan has endured a series of setbacks and clashes that have threatened the fragile peace process. This article examines many key factors affecting the peace process, including rampant corruption, military factionalism, gross human rights abuses and ineffective foreign intervention/pressure. It shows that the past and present failure to structure accountability at the institutional level drives the instability and distrust that has limited the political dialogue and consensus needed to implement the peace deal. To frame this issue of accountability, the article distinguishes between core (essential) and peripheral (self-serving) objectives of promoting accountability. In doing so, it seeks to devise and apply the logic of this dynamic of accountability and to explain the unexpected outcomes of South Sudan's conflict. It argues that, rather than transforming the conditions and hostile relations of South Sudan's situation, international demands for accountability continue to fuel the volatile tensions between international authorities and the various factions inside the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A). The central conclusion the article draws is that instead of signifying the official beginning of the end of the conflict, the peace agreement has wedged itself between the core and peripheral objectives of accountability, thereby setting the stage for further stalemate and increasing distrust among domestic and international authorities.
How Political Is the ICC? Pressing Challenges and the Need for Diplomatic Efficacy
The International Criminal Court faces many daunting political challenges in Kenya, Libya, and Sudan. It has addressed these challenges and defended its impartiality in these situations by insisting that it remains an apolitical institution. This article challenges the conventional focus on the ICC's apolitical nature by adopting an alternative approach that examines its political and pragmatic role in seeking mutual accommodation. It argues that the ICC can and should seek mutual accommodation rather than simply justice under the Rome Statute. In doing so, the article develops and applies the term diplomatic efficacy, or the political capacity of the ICC to produce acceptable solutions, by addressing the soft power dimension of such efficacy. The ICC's diplomatic efficacy not only reflects its special role as an independent court or agent in the interstate system, but also represents a practical and strategic attempt to manage the political problems that its interventions and deferral to national authorities may create. The article concludes that the ICC's political efficacy can help to resolve the incongruities between proactive complementarity and the provisions of cooperation encoded in the Rome Statute.
Courting the Rule of Law? The International Criminal Court and Global Terrorism
Many concerns have arisen regarding the war on terrorism, including the loss of US credibility and the brutal treatment by the US military of detained suspects. Here, Roach argues that International Criminal Court (ICC), which the US government has opposed tout court, could play a constructive role in countering global terrorism. Like, any legal organization, the ICC's legitimacy rests on the fair application of its rules of procedure and its independence from the outside politics.
A Constitutional Right to Secede? Basque Nationalism and the Spanish State
This article analyzes the strategic parameters of a constitutional right to secede. It argues that these parameters help to qualify the right as a potentially effective alternative to either status quo symmetrical arrangements or a constitutional right to national territorial autonomy. To frame the right in this way is a little like decriminalizing drugs. If we legalize secession under certain conditions, we also eliminate much of the volatile tension underlying the demand for secession. Granted, it is possible that such a right might encourage the Basques to secede. However, this is precisely why we need to frame the right to secede in a highly restrictive manner, so that we can strengthen the accountability of this right under public law and redress the residual link between violence and the demand for secession.
Humanitarian Emergencies and the International Criminal Court (ICC): Toward a Cooperative Arrangement between the ICC and UN Security Council
This article analyzes the role of humanitarian intervention in bringing together the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the UN Security Council. It argues that a framework for cooperation between the ICC and Security Council is needed to facilitate a coordinated response to humanitarian emergencies. One of the concepts explored is a mutual legitimacy push, or how the ICC and Security Council can lend effective assistance to one another when responding to humanitarian emergencies. Such a push will not only serve to enhance a response to humanitarian disasters but also close the \"critical gap\" between the moral legitimacy of international humanitarian action and the legality of the UN Charter. The article concludes that a cooperative relationship will not politicize the ICC, and that the ICC and the Security Council, can, through institutional re-engineering, achieve mutual political benefits.
Decisionism and Humanitarian Intervention: Reinterpreting Carl Schmitt and the Global Political Order
International legal scholars and political scientists have devised many alternative proposals to legalize politically legitimized humanitarian interventions. While many of these alternative legal mechanisms have addressed the limits to the UN Charter and the political and economic consequences of intervention, they also have exposed the need for more theoretical analysis of the shift in political responsibilities and decision making from the state to international level. In this article, I draw on Carl Schmitt's theory of decisionism in order to understand the legitimacy and political dynamics of global decisionism. I argue that more theoretical analysis of the political substance of global authority is needed in order to understand the revolutionary content of a human rights enforcement regime.
US Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court: Towards a Third Way of Strategic Accommodation
The United States has argued that its military personnel can and should be exempt from ICC investigation and prosecution, and that the ICC Statute should be revised accordingly. Advocates of the ICC have condemned this position by claiming that it undermines the morale of the ICC and is based on false legal and political pretenses. This article proposes a third way of strategic accommodation involving amendments to the ICC Statute that will serve as structured incentives to the U.S. to (re) sign and ratify the ICC Treaty. Such an arrangement will avert the need for special measures that would violate the integrity of the ICC Statute and build consensus within the Assembly of States Parties. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]