You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
A timely and provocative challenge to the foundations of our global order: why should national borders be unchangeable? The inviolability of national borders is an unquestioned pillar of the post–World War II international order. Fixed borders are believed to encourage stability, promote pluralism, and discourage nationalism and intolerance. But do they? What if fixed borders create more problems than they solve, and what if permitting borders to change would create more stability and produce more just societies? Legal scholar Timothy Waters examines this possibility, showing how we arrived at a system of rigidly bordered states and how the real danger to peace is not the desire of people to form new states but the capacity of existing states to resist that desire, even with violence. He proposes a practical, democratically legitimate alternative: a right of secession. With crises ongoing in the United Kingdom, Spain, Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, and many other regions, this reassessment of the foundations of our international order is more relevant than ever.
The international trial of Slobodan Milosevic, who presided over the violent collapse of Yugoslavia, was already among the longest war crimes trials when Milosevic died in 2006. The contributors to this volume bring a variety of perspectives as they examine the meaning of the trial's termination and its implications for post-conflict justice.
Through an in-depth case study, Some Kind of Justice offers fresh insights about two questions now the subject of robust debate: What goals can we plausibly assign to international criminal tribunals? What factors determine the impact of distant courts on societies that have seen vicious violence? The book offers a timely and original account of how the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) affected local communities, and the factors that shape its changing impact over time.
Winner of the Christopher Ewart-Biggs Literary Award, and nominated for the PEN/JR Ackerley prize. The powerful memoir of a Mullaghmore bombing survivor ___________________________________ On the August bank holiday weekend in 1979, 14-year-old Timothy Knatchbull went on a boat trip off the shore of Mullaghmore in County Sligo, Ireland, with many members of his family. By noon, an IRA bomb had destroyed the boat, leaving four dead. The author survived, but his grandparents, a family friend, and his 14-year-old twin brother did not. Lord Mountbatten, his grandfather - and uncle to the Duke of Edinburgh - was the target, and became one of the IRA's most high-profile assassinations. In telling ...
Americans have never been more divided, and we’re ripe for a breakup. The bitter partisan animosities, the legislative gridlock, the growing acceptance of violence in the name of political virtue—it all invites us to think that we’d be happier were we two different countries. In all the ways that matter, save for the naked force of law, we are already two nations. There’s another reason why secession beckons, says F.H. Buckley: we’re too big. In population and area, the United States is one of the biggest countries in the world, and American Secession provides data showing that smaller countries are happier and less corrupt. They’re less inclined to throw their weight around mili...
In the American West, water adjudication lawsuits are adversarial, expensive, and lengthy. Unsettled Waters is the first detailed study of water adjudications in New Mexico. The state envisioned adjudication as a straightforward accounting of water rights as private property. However, adjudication resurfaced tensions and created conflicts among water sovereigns at multiple scales. Based on more than ten years of fieldwork, this book tells a fascinating story of resistance involving communal water cultures, Native rights and cleaved identities, clashing experts, and unintended outcomes. Whether the state can alter adjudications to meet the water demands in the twenty-first century will have serious consequences.
Bringing together a range of contributors from multiple countries, this interdisciplinary volume offers a unique field view of the rule of law and human rights reform in the reconciliation and reconstruction process. The contributors all worked in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the ten years after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed; here they pause to analyze and critique the work they did. The contributors offer insights from within a variety of international organizations, including the Office of the High Representative, the Organization for Security and Cooperation and Europe, and the United Nations. Allowing those who were in the field to identify, discuss and reflect upon the programmes and policies, the collection reveals how the programmes were created, what laws they were pursuant to, and what alternatives were rejected and why. The authors not only assess both the positive and negative aspects and outcomes of their work, but also comment on lessons learned for future post-conflict reconstruction scenarios.
In United States Law and Policy on Transitional Justice: Principles, Politics, and Pragmatics, Zachary D. Kaufman explores the U.S. government's support for, or opposition to, certain transitional justice institutions. By first presenting an overview of possible responses to atrocities (such as war crimes tribunals) and then analyzing six historical case studies, Kaufman evaluates why and how the United States has pursued particular transitional justice options since World War II. This book challenges the "legalist" paradigm, which postulates that liberal states pursue war crimes tribunals because their decision-makers hold a principled commitment to the rule of law. Kaufman develops an alte...
What does it mean to say that a particular war is just or unjust, that terrorism is always wrong, or that torture can sometimes be morally justified? What are the moral bases for the possession or use of nuclear weapons, intervening in other countries’ civil wars, or being a bystander to genocide? Such questions take us to the heart of what is morally right and wrong behaviour in our world. Global Violence: Ethical and Political Issues provides readers with the analytical tools to better understand the suppositions that underlie the debates about such questions, as well as advances its own reasoned and informed ethical analyses of these topics. The book engages different normative approaches from the fields of ethics, political theory, and international relations and uses them to examine a set of case studies on the subjects of inter-state and civil war, nuclear weapons, terrorism, torture and genocide.
In The Trial of Hissein Habré: The International Crimes of a Former Head of State, Emmanuel Guematcha recounts the trial of Hissein Habré, the former head of state of Chad. Accused of committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture while ruling Chad between 1982 and 1990, Hissein Habré was tried in Dakar, Senegal, by the Extraordinary African Chambers. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2016 and the sentence was confirmed in 2017. . In a narrative style, Guematcha examines the process that led to this achievement in Africa, including the failed attempts to try Hissein Habré in the Senegalese, Chadian, and Belgian courts. Guematcha discusses the mobilization of victims and the involvement of nongovernmental and international organizations. He describes the particularities of the Extraordinary African Chambers, analyzes the establishment of Hissein Habré’s criminal responsibility, and presents the trial through the testimonies of several victims, witnesses, and experts. These testimonies shed light on what it means for individuals to be subjected to international crimes. The author also questions the impact and significance of the trial in Africa and beyond.