... admirably thorough ... well-researched and articulate arguments.

International Peacekeeping

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

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, winner of an ASIL Certificate of Merit 2002, begins with an examination of the genealogy of that right, and argues 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 a substantive one to a formal one 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.
Les mer
The question of the legality of humanitarian intervention is a simple one - the Charter of the United Nations prohibits the use of force, with only two exceptions. This study examines the argument that a right of unilateral intervention pre-existed the charter.
Les mer
Introduction ; 1. The Just War: The origins of humanitarian intervention ; 2. The Scourge of War: Humanitarian intervention and the prohibition of the use of force in the UN Charter ; 3. 'You, the People': Unilateral intervention to promote democracy ; 4. The New Interventionism: Threats to international peace and security and Security Council actions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter ; 5. Passing the Baton: The delegation of Security Council enforcement powers from Kuwait to Kosovo ; 6. Just War or Just Peace? Humanitarian intervention, inhumanitarian non-intervention and other peace strategies ; Bibliography
Les mer
`... provides a useful analysis of the complex and controversial subject of humanitarian intervention in international law. ... The most significant contribution of the book to existing legal literature is contained in its analysis of the role of Security Council in the post 'cold-war' period. ... As a realistic portrayal of the limitations of international law, there is much to be commended in the present book. ... the book will appeal to international lawyers, political scientists and to other inquisitive readers.' ICLQ Vol. 50, 2001 `Dr Chesterman's new work is a useful corrective to those who would cheerily dissolve the distinction between legality and power, or between legal analysis and agitprop. ... [The] book provides legal and analytical tools that, hopefully, will help us differentiate between an excusable illegality, and yet another cynical usurpation of international law in the service of raison d'état.' Melbourne University Law Review `... a useful analysis of the complex and controversial subject of humanitarian intervention in international law. ... The most significant contribution of the book to existing legal literature is contained in its analysis of the role of [the] Security Council in the post 'cold-war' period. ... As a realistic portrayal of the limitations of international law, there is much to be commended in the present book. ... a welcome addition to the contemporary debate on the subject; the book will appeal to international lawyers, political scientists and to other inquisitive readers.' International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 50, Issue 4, 2001 `In this lucid and insightful volume, Chesterman provides a sophisticated but accessible account of the historical and contemporary relationship between humanitarian intervention and international law. Just War or Just Peace? provides both an excellent teaching resource for advanced undergraduates and beyond, and a wealth of information for researchers and professionals working in this area.' African Affairs `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 `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
Les mer
Winner of the Oxford University Dasturzada Dr Jal Pavry Memorial Prize 2000
The most thorough analysis of the legal and political implications of the doctrine of humanitarian intervention available Integrated historical analysis that establishes the historical themes that run up to the present day Covers both unilateral and multilateral interventions Thorough and critical analysis of UN Security Council practice in authorizing the use of force through the 1990s
Les mer
Simon Chesterman is a Senior Associate at the International Peace Academy in New York
The most thorough analysis of the legal and political implications of the doctrine of humanitarian intervention available Integrated historical analysis that establishes the historical themes that run up to the present day Covers both unilateral and multilateral interventions Thorough and critical analysis of UN Security Council practice in authorizing the use of force through the 1990s
Les mer

Produktdetaljer

ISBN
9780199243372
Publisert
2001
Utgiver
Oxford University Press
Vekt
616 gr
Høyde
242 mm
Bredde
163 mm
Dybde
22 mm
Aldersnivå
P, 06
Språk
Product language
Engelsk
Format
Product format
Innbundet
Antall sider
326

Forfatter

Biografisk notat

Simon Chesterman is a Senior Associate at the International Peace Academy in New York