Glenville examines then the emergence of the concept of R2P and its implications for sovereignty. He shows that, even though there have been great advances in the relationship between sovereignty and responsibility, especially after the s, the develop- ment of this idea has deep roots in history, reflected in both theory and practice.
Sec- ond, the confrontation of the reification of the alleged traditional sense of sovereignty, which leads to a change in the ethical debate about sov- ereignty and its rights and responsibilities. Third, a better understanding of what it means to have international consensus on the idea that relates sovereignty and R2P. However, power takes a peripheral place in the book, which the author acknowledges, as its discussion of R2P itself neglects the confron- tation between the Global South and the Global North.
- Bolt Action.
- Just and Unjust Military Intervention: European Thinkers from Vitoria to Mill.?
- Recordações do Escrivão Isaías Caminha (Portuguese Edition);
- What is Kobo Super Points?.
- Basic Magick: Your Path to Self, Knowledge and Power.
In other words, to understand the historical struggle between the rights and responsibili- ties embedded in sovereignty does not diminish the fear of those with less power in the international arena, who tend to diverge from Western countries regarding intervention issues. All things considered, this book nonetheless offers major contribu- tions to the discussion of the concept of sovereignty and its relationship with R2P.
Oxford University Press, , pp. Aneek Chatterjee Presidency University, Kolkata The history of international relations is replete with military interven- tions by major powers, dating back to the Napoleonic Wars. During the Cold War, both super powers resorted to military interventions to change the course of international politics. The Western powers and the Soviet Union laboured hard to vindicate their military actions through ideo- logical, legal, systems-related, and interest-based justifications during the Cold War.
In the post-Cold War period, such justifications persisted. But has the rhetoric changed?
- Blues I Love To Sing;
- Millennial Projections.
- The Mersey Sound: Restored 50th Anniversary Edition (Penguin Modern Classics).
What are the new normative, le- gal, and ideological arguments offered by Russia and the West for their military interventions? Is there convergence or collision inamongst these various justifications? To remedy this, Allison analyses the military interventions from the Gulf War of to that ofLibyan conflict in His commendable analysis of the military interventions in between, in Kosovo , Afghanistan , Iraq , and Georgia , by both Russia and the West, will be of interest to stu- dents of both international politics and history.
His reliance on the English School theorists helps him to analysze the divide between pluralist and solidar- ist variants of international society, and leads him to argue that since the late Soviet period, Russia has vacillated along a pluralist—solidar- ist continuum, but Russia has been positioned primarily in the pluralist camp since Gorbachev p.
Since the early s, Russia has increasingly tried to interpret international law in order to coun- teract human-centric normative universalism p. Since the end of that decade, Russia has wielded the principle of non-intervention more explicitly as a shield against foreign involvement in domestic affairs, and in the CIS. For instance, the Gulf War confirmed that the Soviet leadership agreed with its Western counterparts over the inviolability of the UN Charter.
Therefore, in Kosovo, Russia countered military intervention with refer- ence to the UN system and the international legal regimes. As Allison writes, the initial Russian—American solidarity over counter-terrorism faded quickly p. In its rationale behind the use of force in Afghanistan in for counter-terrorism, Russia positioned itself between the United States and other Western powers sceptical of military operations in Afghani- stan, specifically France and Germany. It followed a pluralistic position, while raising concerns about terrorist activities in Chechnya and Geor- gia.
Stefano Recchia : Just and Unjust Military Intervention: European Thinkers from Vitoria to Mill
Since the Kosovo crisis, the Russian position on global norms ra- tionalizing military interventions has contrasted with Western powers, within a broader pluralistic perspective. Gone are the days of overt ideological convergence, as illustrated during the course of the Gulf War, and to some extent during the war in Afghanistan. Since the Iraqi crisis, Russia questioned the tendency of the West to set global norms.
- Just and Unjust Military Intervention;
- Dangerous Games: Number 4 in series (Riley Jenson Guardian).
- Post navigation.
The shift has been remarkably captured by Allison when he writes in the concluding chapter: The book blends theoretical perspectives with case studies in a splen- did manner. However, one minor point of disagreement persists: Only time will tell. But this issue certainly is a minor one in the backdrop of the overall brilliance of the work. Allison deserves credit for bringing out a timely book on a hitherto neglected yet impor- tant issue in international politics. Cambridge University Press, , pp.
Crit- ics questioned the authority and intentions of the intervening coalition. Some alleged that the intervention carried out in the name of R2P was indeed driven by narrow national interests of regime change, while oth- ers argued more generally that R2P has become a tool to legitimize inter- ventions by great powers. In order to capture the essence of theoretical debates, the book con- centrates on three core areas: Who has the authority to intervene?
What types of interventions are needed?
The thinkers featured in this volume differ significantly in their treatment of these questions. Thus, he justified intervention as punishment p. Pertaining to right authority, Vitoria allowed both public and private persons to wage war. However, he imposed substantial limitations on private war, which can be justified only in case of immediate danger to person and property, and should be abandoned as soon as the dan- ger passes. Unlike Vitoria, Gentili believed that the legitimate right to wage war belongs exclusively to states, and that consequently, private individuals do not have that right p.
His idea of collective in- tervention is shared by modern thinkers and leaders of the contempo- rary Global South. Classical arguments about the legitimate use of force have profoundly shaped the norms and institutions of contemporary international society. But what specific lessons can we learn from the classical European philosophers and jurists when thinking about humanitarian intervention, preventive self-defense or international trusteeship today?
The contributors to this volume take seriously the admonition of contextualist scholars not to uproot classical thinkers' arguments from their social, political and intellectual environment. Nevertheless, this collection demonstrates that contemporary students, scholars and policymakers can still learn a great deal from the questions raised by classical European thinkers, the problems they highlighted, and even the problematic character of some of the solutions they offered.
The aim of this volume is to open up current assumptions about military intervention, and to explore the possibility of reconceptualizing and reappraising contemporary approaches. Intervention in European history, c. War in the face of doubt: Grotius, Hobbes and Pufendorf on humanitarian intervention Richard Tuck; 5.
Join Kobo & start eReading today
John Locke on intervention, uncertainty, and insurgency Samuel Moyn; 6. Intervention and sovereign equality: Sovereignty, morality and history: Revisiting Kant and intervention Andrew Hurrell; Setting a gold standard for edited collections, Just and Unjust Military Intervention will surely and deservedly be seen a landmark text in its field. Intervention in European history, c. War in the face of doubt: Grotius, Hobbes and Pufendorf on humanitarian intervention Richard Tuck; 5.
John Locke on intervention, uncertainty, and insurgency Samuel Moyn; 6. Intervention and sovereign equality: Sovereignty, morality and history: Revisiting Kant and intervention Andrew Hurrell; Edmund Burke and intervention: