Since the nineteenth century, Hugo Grotiuss 'Rights of War and Peace' has commonly been seen as the classic work in modern public international law, laying the foundation for a universal code of law. However, in the seventeenth century and during the Enlightenment, the work was considered a major work of political theory that strongly defended the rights of individual agents -- states as well as private persons -- to use their power to secure themselves and their property. Grotiuss continuing influence owed much to the eighteenth-century French editor Jean Barbeyrac, whose extensive commentary was standard in most editions, including the classic, anonymously translated, English one (1738), which is the basis for the Liberty Fund edition. The present edition also includes the Prolegomena to the first edition of 'Rights of War and Peace' (1625); this document has never before been translated into English and adds new dimensions to the great work.

Can we achieve justice during war? Should law substitute for realpolitik? Can an international court act against the global community that created it? Justice in a Time of War is a translation from the French of the first complete, behind-the-scenes story of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, from its proposal by Balkan journalist Mirko Klarin through recent developments in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic. It is also a meditation on the conflicting intersection of law and politics in achieving justice and peace. Le Monde's review (November 3, 2000) of the original edition recommended Hazan's book as a nuanced account of the Tribunal that should be a must-read for the new leaders of Yugoslavia. "" The story Pierre Hazan tells is that of an institution which, over the course of the years, has managed to escape in large measure from the initial hidden motives and manipulations of those who created it (and not only the Americans)."" With insider interviews filling out every scene, Hazan tells a chaotic story of war that raged while the Western powers cobbled together a tribunal in order to avoid actual intervention. The international lawyers and judges for this rump world court started with nothing - but they ultimately established the tribunal as an unavoidable actor in the Balkans. The West had created the Tribunal in 1993, hoping to threaten international criminals with indictment and thereby force an untenable peace. In 1999, the Tribunal suddenly became useful to NATO countries as a means by which to criminalize Milosevic's regime and to justify military intervention in Kosovo and in Serbia. Ultimately, this hastened the end of Milosevic's rule and led the way to history's first war crimes trial of a former president by an international tribunal. Hazan's account of the Tribunal's formation and evolution questions the contradictory policies of the Western powers and illuminates a cautionary tale for the reader: realizing ideals in a world enamored of realpolitik is a difficult and often haphazard activity.

Can we achieve justice during war? Should law substitute for realpolitik? Can an international court act against the global community that created it? Justice in a Time of War is a translation from the French of the first complete, behind-the-scenes story of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, from its proposal by Balkan journalist Mirko Klarin through recent developments in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic. It is also a meditation on the conflicting intersection of law and politics in achieving justice and peace. Le Monde's review (November 3, 2000) of the original edition recommended Hazan's book as a nuanced account of the Tribunal that should be a must-read for the new leaders of Yugoslavia. "" The story Pierre Hazan tells is that of an institution which, over the course of the years, has managed to escape in large measure from the initial hidden motives and manipulations of those who created it (and not only the Americans)."" With insider interviews filling out every scene, Hazan tells a chaotic story of war that raged while the Western powers cobbled together a tribunal in order to avoid actual intervention. The international lawyers and judges for this rump world court started with nothing - but they ultimately established the tribunal as an unavoidable actor in the Balkans. The West had created the Tribunal in 1993, hoping to threaten international criminals with indictment and thereby force an untenable peace. In 1999, the Tribunal suddenly became useful to NATO countries as a means by which to criminalize Milosevic's regime and to justify military intervention in Kosovo and in Serbia. Ultimately, this hastened the end of Milosevic's rule and led the way to history's first war crimes trial of a former president by an international tribunal. Hazan's account of the Tribunal's formation and evolution questions the contradictory policies of the Western powers and illuminates a cautionary tale for the reader: realizing ideals in a world enamored of realpolitik is a difficult and often haphazard activity.

Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in its current form is incomplete and outdated. Due to significant development at a legislative and judicial level, the right to life spans beyond what is enumerated within Article 2. With the belief that Article 2 is still relevant, this book investigates how the right to life can be better protected within Europe. It advocates for the modernisation of Article 2 through codifying legislative and judicial developments relevant to this provision in the form of guidelines. It also considers the improvements that can be made by the Council of Europe (CoE) bodies - the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Committee of Ministers (CoM), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and the CoE Commissioner for Human Rights - to encourage adherence to Article 2 and promote effective remedies to prevent future violations. It uses the experience from four internal European conflicts - the Basque conflict, the Chechen conflict, the Northern Ireland Troubles and the Turkish-Kurdish conflict - to illustrate its points.

What are the limits of human rights, and what do these limits mean? This volume engages critically and constructively with this question to provide a distinct contribution to the contemporary discussion on human rights. Fassbender and Traisbach, along with a group of leading experts in the field, examine the issue from multiple disciplinary perspectives, analysing the limits of our current discourse of human rights. It does so in an original way, and without attempting to deconstruct, or deny, human rights. Each contribution is supplemented by an engaging comment which furthers this important discussion. This combination of perspectives paves the way for further thought for scholars, practitioners, students, and the wider public. Ultimately, this volume provides an exceptionally rich spectrum of viewpoints and arguments across disciplines to offer fresh insights into human rights and its limitations.

As Israel's control of the Occupied Palestinian Territory nears its fiftieth anniversary, The Writing on the Wall offers a critical perspective on the international law of occupation. Advocating a normative and functional approach to occupation and to the question of when it exists, it analyzes the application of humanitarian and human rights law, pointing to the risk of using the law of occupation in its current version to legitimize new variations of conquest and colonialism. The book points to the need for reconsidering the law of occupation in light of changing forms of control, such as those evident in Gaza. Although the Israeli occupation is a main focal point, the book broadens its compass to look at other cases, such as Iraq, Northern Cyprus, and Western Sahara, highlighting the role that international law plays in all of these cases.

Women and the LGBT community in Russia and Turkey face pervasive discrimination. Only a small percentage dare to challenge their mistreatment in court. Facing domestic police and judges who often refuse to recognize discrimination, a small minority of activists have exhausted their domestic appeals and then turned to their last hope: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The ECtHR, located in Strasbourg, France, is widely regarded as the most effective international human rights court in existence. Russian citizens whose rights have been violated at home have brought tens of thousands of cases to the ECtHR over the past two decades. But only one of these cases resulted in a finding of gender discrimination by the ECtHR-and that case was brought by a man. By comparison, the Court has found gender discrimination more frequently in decisions on Turkish cases. Courting Gender Justice explores the obstacles that confront citizens, activists, and lawyers who try to bring gender discrimination cases to court. To shed light on the factors that make rare victories possible in discrimination cases, the book draws comparisons among forms of discrimination faced by women and LGBT people in Russia and Turkey. Based on interviews with human rights and feminist activists and lawyers in Russia and Turkey, this engaging book grounds the law in the personal experiences of individual people fighting to defend their rights.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has a complex position in international relations, being the guardian of international humanitarian law but often acting discretely to advance human dignity. Treated by most governments as if it were an inter-governmental organization, the ICRC is a non-governmental organization, all-Swiss at the top, and it is given rights and duties in the 1949 Geneva Conventions for Victims of War. Written by two formidable experts in the field, this book analyzes international humanitarian action as practiced by the International Red Cross, explaining its history and structure as well as examining contemporary field experience and broad diplomatic initiatives related to its principal tasks. Such tasks include: ensuring that detention conditions are humane for those imprisoned by reason of political conflict or war providing material and moral relief in conflict promoting development of the humanitarian part of the laws of war improving the unity and effectiveness of the movement Fully updated throughout, the new edition will also include brand new material on: armed actors who do not accept humanitarian restrictions on their actions, including expanded coverage of the Islamic State (ISIL, ISIS), Al Shabab, and Boko Haram, among others Syrian internationalized civil war issue of drone strikes and targeted killings, and the continuing push for regulation of what is called cyber war the question of the field of application of international humanitarian law (what is the battlefield?). Particularly when states declare "war" on "terrorist groups" operating inside other states regulation of new weapons and new uses of old weapons

This book is unique in exploring from an African perspective the dilemmas and complexities involved in addressing past human rights violations to enable a society move to a more peaceful future. While challenging current transitional justice narratives, which have inadequately addressed the concerns of post-conflict societies in Africa, it also emphasises the need to avoid representing African issues as 'exotic' and 'exceptional'. The authors consider the core debates about how to develop a transitional justice agenda and assess the potential of localised justice models to contribute to justice systems. They show the importance of pursuing locally forged processes that take account of the dynamic and complex challenges of post-conflict societies in Africa and of involving stakeholders in developing policies and practices that affect them. This important new publication also addresses frankly the tension between justice, peace and reconciliation and deepens comprehension of the ever-changing boundaries of transitional justice.

Since the end of the last century, UN peacekeeping has undergone a fundamental and largely unexamined change. Peacekeeping operations, long expected to use force only in self-defence and to act impartially, are now increasingly relied upon by the Security Council as a means to maintain and restore security within a country. The operations are established under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and some are empowered to use 'all necessary measures', language traditionally reserved for enforcement operations. Through a close examination of these twenty-first century peacekeeping operations - including operations in Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire, Haiti and the Darfur region of the Sudan - the book shows that they are, for the most part, fundamentally ill-suited to the enforcement-type tasks being asked of them. The operations, which are under-funded, under-equipped and whose troops are under-trained, frequently lurch from crisis to crisis. There is scant evidence, some 10 years on, that matters are likely to improve. The book argues that bestowing enforcement-type functions on a peacekeeping operation is misconceived. Such operations are likely to be unsuccessful in their enforcement-type tasks, thereby causing serious damage to the excellent reputation of UN peacekeeping, and the UN more broadly. In addition, because such operations are more likely to be perceived as partial, their ability to carry out traditional (non-forceful) peacekeeping tasks may be impeded. Finally, the Security Council's practice of charging peacekeeping operations with enforcement functions lessens the pressure on the Council to work to establish genuine enforcement operations - ie, operations that are considerably better suited to restoring peace and security. '...Dr Sloan is able to show, in knowledgeable detail, not only what has changed over the years, but also what has brought these changes about. His analysis leads him to offer not only well-informed insights, but critical observations, too...This book is a pleasing combination of detailed scrutiny of topics already familiar (provisional measures, consent, so-called 'Chapter VI1/2' action, implied powers) and a rigorous questioning as to their place in - or indeed, relevance at all to - militarised peacekeeping. The reader will find much new terrain traversed, and plenty of out-of-the-box thinking.' From the foreword by Dame Rosalyn Higgins

A number of commentators assert that the military response to the terrorist atrocities of 11 September 2001 - encompassing attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, and commonly referred to as the 'war on terror' - has significantly impacted upon the international law regulating resort to armed force by states (jus ad bellum), loosening the constraints on self-defence. Some even suggest that the very future of the United Nations, in particular the Security Council and its collective security system, is at risk - at least in its current form. This book does not address the question of the future of the United Nations, an issue probably best left to scholars of international relations. Instead, it seeks to place the 'war on terror' within the context of international law, assessing how, or whether, it can be accommodated within the existing legal framework limiting the use of force. Through an examination of the lawfulness (or otherwise) of both Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, including the legal justifications advanced by those states involved and the reaction of the international community, and involving a detailed discussion of the most important developments (ie, the permissibility of self-defence against non-state, terrorist, actors and the 'Bush doctrine' of pre-emptive self-defence against terrorists as proclaimed in the 2002 US National Security Strategy) the book determines whether, and to what extent, the right to use force - or the acceptability of such military action - is currently undergoing a radical transformation. By assessing subsequent developments illustrating the impact that military action against Afghanistan and Iraq has had on the jus ad bellum, this book represents a distinctive and original contribution to the academic literature.

Against the backdrop of the British-American law-making and war-making of the first decade of the millennium, Fighting Monsters considers: how the way we think about law affects the way we make war and how the way we think about war affects the way we make law. The discussion is founded upon four of the martial phenomena that unsettle our complacent and flabby understandings of what law is to a liberal democracy: aggressive or 'pre-emptive' war, targeted killings, torture, and arbitrary detention. The book argues, first, that force is a quintessential - albeit ambivalent - element of any realistic, serviceable, and intellectually coherent concept of law. Second, reappraising the classic question at the intersection of martial doctrine and political philosophy in its contemporary context, the book asserts that we need not, in fighting monsters, become monstrous ourselves; that fighting partisans does not entail our own partisanship; and that we can indeed govern without dirtying our hands. Seeking to ground a total, essentialist, and practical theory of legality's sordid relationship with brutality, this broad, coherent, and original book encompasses: language and image * war and crime * liberty, security, and rationality * amity, enmity, and identity * sex, terror, and perversion * temporality, spirituality, and sublimity * economy and hegemony * parliaments, the press, and the public man.

Over the past twenty-five years, significant changes in the conduct of wars have increasingly placed civilians in traditional military roles - employing civilians to execute drone strikes, the 'targeted killing' of suspected terrorists, the use of private security contractors in combat zones, and the spread of cyber attacks. Under the laws of armed conflict, civilians cannot be targeted unless they take direct part in hostilities. Once civilians take action, they become targets. This book analyses the complex question of how to identify just who those civilians are. Identifying the Enemy examines the history of civilian participation in armed conflict and how the law has responded to such action. It asks the crucial question: what is 'direct participation in hostilities'? The book slices through the attempts to untie this Gordian knot, and shows that the changing nature of warfare has called into question the very foundation of the civilian/military dichotomy that is at the heart of the law of armed conflict.

As shown by the trials of Slobodan Milosevic, Charles Taylor and Saddam Hussein, the large-scale and systematic commission of international crimes is usually planned and set in motion by senior political and military leaders. Nevertheless, the application of traditional forms of criminal liability leads to the conclusion that they are mere accessories to such crimes. This does not reflect their central role and often results in a punishment which is inappropriately low in view of the impact of their actions and omissions. For these reasons, international criminal law has placed special emphasis on the development of concepts, such as control of the crime and joint criminal enterprise (also known as the common purpose doctrine), which aim at reflecting better the central role played by senior political and military leaders in campaigns of large scale and systematic commission of international crimes. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the case law of the ICTY and the ICTR have, in recent years, played a unique role in the achievement of this goal. Hector Olasolo's book is indispensible to anyone interested in bringing top leaders, political or military, to account for their complicity in crimes. A.G. Noorani Frontline September 2009

The Nuremberg Interviews reveals the chilling innermost thoughts of the former Nazi officials under indictment at the famous postwar trial. The architects of one of history's greatest atrocities speak out about their lives, their careers in the Nazi Party and their views on the Holocaust. Their reflections are recorded in a set of interviews conducted by a U.S. Army psychiatrist. Dr Leon Goldensohn was entrusted with monitoring the mental health of the two dozen German leaders charged with carrying out genocide, as well as that of many of the defence and prosecution witnesses. These recorded conversations have gone largely unexamined for more than fifty years. Here are interviews with some of the highest-ranking Nazi officials in the Nuremberg jails, including Hans Frank, Hermann Goering, Ernest Kaltenbrunner, and Joachim von Ribbentrop. Here, too, are interviews with lesser-known officials who were, nonetheless, essential to the workings of the Third Reich. Goldensohn was a particularly astute interviewer, his training as a psychiatrist leading him to probe the motives, the rationales, and the skewing of morality that allowed these men to enact an unfathomable evil. Candid and often shockingly truthful, these interviews are deeply disturbing in their illumination of an ideology gone mad. Each interview is annotated with biographical information and footnotes that place the man and his actions in their historical context and are a profoundly important addition to our understanding of the Nazi mind and mission.

Since the end of the Cold War, the protection of human life has been a key priority of the international community. Though France has been at the forefront of these humanitarian efforts, its international role in and long-standing commitment to human protection overlooked and underestimated. Eglantine Staunton offers a compelling corrective to prevailing assumptions about France's foreign policy, examining its relationship to the dominant international principles established by the humanitarian intervention of the 1990s and the UN's Responsibility to Protect doctrine in 2005. Combining case studies of the interventions in Kosovo, Rwanda and Iraq, among others, and interviews with key actors including Gareth Evans and Bernard Kouchner, Staunton's innovative theoretical framework offers a valuable tool for understanding the interplay between domestic and international norms. -- .

This book analyses the way in which international human rights law (IHRL) and international investment law (IIL) are deployed - or fail to be deployed - in conflict countries within the context of natural resources extraction. It specifically analyses the way in which IIL protections impact on the parallel protection of economic, social and cultural rights (ESC rights) in the host state, especially the right to water. Arguing that current responses have been unsatisfactory, it considers the emergence of the 'Protect, Respect and Remedy' framework and the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights (jointly the Framework) as a possible analytical instrument. In so doing, it proposes a different approach to the way in which the Framework is generally interpreted, and then investigates the possible applicability of this 'recalibrated' Framework to the study of the IHRL-IIL interplay in a host country in a protracted armed conflict: Afghanistan. Through the emblematic example of Afghanistan, the book presents a practical dimension to its legal analysis. It uniquely portrays the elusive intersection between these two bodies of international law within a host country where the armed conflict continues to rage and a full economic restructuring is taking place away from the public eye, not least through the deployment of IIL and the inaction - or merely partial consideration - of IHRL. The book will be of interest to academics, policy-makers, and practitioners of international organisations involved in IHRL, IIL and/or deployed in contexts of armed conflict.

Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in its current form is incomplete and outdated. Due to significant development at a legislative and judicial level, the right to life spans beyond what is enumerated within Article 2. With the belief that Article 2 is still relevant, this book investigates how the right to life can be better protected within Europe. It advocates for the modernisation of Article 2 through codifying legislative and judicial developments relevant to this provision in the form of guidelines. It also considers the improvements that can be made by the Council of Europe (CoE) bodies - the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Committee of Ministers (CoM), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and the CoE Commissioner for Human Rights - to encourage adherence to Article 2 and promote effective remedies to prevent future violations. It uses the experience from four internal European conflicts - the Basque conflict, the Chechen conflict, the Northern Ireland Troubles and the Turkish-Kurdish conflict - to illustrate its points.

Since the first edition of this book was published in 2010, United Nations peace operations have evolved significantly. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, and South Sudan, UN peacekeepers are now engaged in building peace by fighting non-State armed actors, and must consider issues concerning the application of law and policy governing the use of armed force when protecting civilians. In addition, the UN and its peacekeepers are increasingly being held to higher standards of accountability to ensure that their engagement with local forces and populations meets normative requirements found in international humanitarian law and international human rights law. This extensively revised edition of Documents on the Law of UN Peace Operations addresses the key normative principles, rules, and standards that have been a part of this evolution. The book provides essential documents, accompanied with commentary, which identify and explain the legal framework or applicable legal norms involved in the planning, management and conduct of UN peace operations. Topics covered include obligations under international humanitarian law, human rights law, international criminal law, and privileges and immunities. Special attention is also paid to matters such as accountability, the rule of law, and the protection of civilians.

This is the second volume of a projected five-volume series charting the causes of war from 3000 BCE to the present day, written by a leading international lawyer, and using as its principal materials the documentary history of international law, largely in the form of treaties and the negotiations which led up to them. These volumes seek to show why millions of people, over thousands of years, slew each other. In departing from the various theories put forward by historians, anthropologists and psychologists, Gillespie offers a different taxonomy of the causes of war, focusing on the broader settings of politics, religion, migrations and empire-building. These four contexts were dominant and often overlapping justifications during the first four thousand years of human civilisation, for which written records exist.

The international law on the use of force is one of the oldest branches of international law. It is an area twinned with the emergence of international law as a concept in itself, and which sees law and politics collide. The number of armed conflicts is equal only to the number of methodological approaches used to describe them. Many violent encounters are well known. The Kosovo Crisis in 1999 and the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 spring easily to the minds of most scholars and academics, and gain extensive coverage in this text. Other conflicts, including the Belgian operation in Stanleyville, and the Ethiopian Intervention in Somalia, are often overlooked to our peril. Ruys and Corten's expert-written text compares over sixty different instances of the use of cross border force since the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945, from all out warfare to hostile encounters between individual units, targeted killings, and hostage rescue operations, to ask a complex question. How much authority does the power of precedent really have in the law of the use of force?

With the end of the Cold War has come an upsurge in humanitarian interventions-military campaigns aimed at ending mass atrocities. These wars of rescue, waged in the name of ostensibly universal norms of human rights and legal principles, rest on the premise that a genuine "international community" has begun to emerge and has reached consensus on a procedure for eradicating mass killings. Rajan Menon argues that, in fact, humanitarian intervention remains deeply divisive as a concept and as a policy, and is flawed besides. The advocates of humanitarian intervention have produced a mountain of writings to support their claim that human rights precepts now exert an unprecedented influence on states' foreign policies and that we can therefore anticipate a comprehensive solution to mass atrocities. In The Conceit of Humanitarian Intervention, Menon shows that this belief, while noble, is naive. States continue to act principally based on what they regard at any given time as their national interests. Delivering strangers from oppression ranks low on their list of priorities. Indeed, even democratic states routinely embrace governments that trample the human rights values on which the humanitarian intervention enterprise rests. States' ethical commitment to waging war to end atrocities remains episodic and erratic-more rhetorical than real. And when these missions are undertaken, the strategies and means used invariably produce perverse, even dangerous results. This, in no small measure, stems from the hubris of leaders-and the acolytes of humanitarian intervention-who have come to believe that they possesses the wisdom and wherewithal to bestow freedom and stability upon societies about which they know little.

Genocide is one of the most heinous abuses of human rights imaginable, yet reaction to it by European governments in the post-Cold War world has been criticised for not matching the severity of the crime. European governments rarely agree on whether to call a situation genocide, and their responses to purported genocides have often been limited to delivering humanitarian aid to victims and supporting prosecution of perpetrators in international criminal tribunals. More coercive measures - including sanctions or military intervention - are usually rejected as infeasible or unnecessary. This book explores the European approach to genocide, reviewing government attitudes towards the negotiation and ratification of the 1948 Genocide Convention and analysing responses to purported genocides since the end of the Second World War. Karen E. Smith considers why some European governments were hostile to the Genocide Convention and why European governments have been reluctant to use the term genocide to describe atrocities ever since.

The purpose of this book is to consider the legality of the changing practice of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). It provides extensive legal analysis of the ICRC as an organisation, legal person, and humanitarian actor. It draws on the law of organisations, International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and other relevant branches of international law in order to critically assess the mandate and practice of the ICRC on the ground. The book also draws on more abstract human-centric concepts, including sovereignty as responsibility and human security, in order to assess the development of the concept of humanity for the mandate and practice of the ICRC. Critically this book uses semi- structured interviews with ICRC delegates to test the theoretical and doctrinal conclusions. The book provides a unique insight into the work of the ICRC. It also includes a case study of the work of the ICRC in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Ultimately the book concludes that the ICRC is no longer restricted to the provision of humanitarian assistance on the battlefield. It is increasingly drawn into long-term and extremely complicated conflicts, in which, civilians, soldiers and non-State actors intermingle. In order to remain useful for the people on the ground, therefore, the ICRC is progressively developing its mandate. This book questions whether, on occasion, this could threaten its promise to remain neutral, impartial and independent. Finally, however, it should be said that this author finds that the work of the ICRC is unparalleled on the international stage and its humanitarian mandate is a vital component for those embroiled in the undertaking of and recovery from conflict.

The chief means to limit and calculate the costs of war are the philosophical and legal concepts of proportionality and necessity. Both categories are meant to restrain the most horrific potential of war. The volume explores the moral and legal issues in the modern law of war in three major categories. In so doing, the contributions will look for new and innovative approaches to understanding the process of weighing lives implicit in all theories of jus in bello: who counts in war, understanding proportionality, and weighing lives in asymmetric conflicts. These questions arise on multiple levels and require interdisciplinary consideration of both philosophical and legal themes.