Titlebook: Values and Weapons; From Humanitarian In Janne Haaland Matlary Book 2006 Janne Haaland Matlary 2006 Europe.human rights.intervention.terror

entice

Differing Legitimacy,er of institutional multilateralism. In the US case, legitimacy is rooted primarily in domestic politics — in the concept of national security interests as well as in the concept of ethics, of the values served by using force. How do these different conceptions of legitimacy fit with the cases of Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq?

粘土

,‘Failed’ States and Terrorism,k to the concept, defining ‘failed’ states as those which are ‘consumed by internal violence and cease delivering positive political goods to their inhabitants’ (Rotberg 2004). The ‘rogue’ state is less of a scholarly term; in fact, it is an American political term which denotes a dictatorship or a repressive state.

倔強(qiáng)一點(diǎn)

978-1-349-54121-8Janne Haaland Matlary 2006

來(lái)就得意

完整

Introduction: The Rules of the Game,ry force in international politics, as defined in the UN Charter, are perhaps the most important rules we have. And here the most pivotal rule is the prohibition against using military force as a tool of normal statecraft.

一條卷發(fā)

Conditional Sovereignty,ce of conditional sovereignty in the form of democracy/human rights today. How far has a normative change in this direction taken place, and what may it imply for the use of force in a pro-democratic direction?

frugal

RAG

Book 2006Values and Weapons looks at the determinants of legitimacy for using military force in the US and Europe. Sovereignty has been redefined to be conditional on democratic government, and this makes it much easier to intervene into non-democratic states.

洞穴

https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230599734Europe; human rights; intervention; terrorism; democracy

overwrought

How Does the Intervention Norm Change? The , of Human Rights and Security Needs,As discussed in Chapter 2, . have become key variables for states, as they have for businesses and international organizations. Intervention with soft-power tools has become more acceptable as part of normal foreign policy-making, and states often use NGOs and international organizations to do this work.