Targeted killings represent both the contemporary weapon of choice and, clearly, the weapon of the future. From the perspective of the nation-state, the benefits of targeted killing are clear: aggressive measures against identified targets can be carried out with minimal, if any, risk to soldiers. But while the threat to soldiers is minimal, there are other risks that must be considered. Particularly, there is a high possibility of collateral damage as well as legitimate concerns regarding how a target is defined. Clearly broad legal, moral, and operational issues are at stake when considering targeted killing. In Legitimate Target, A Criteria Based Approach to Targeted Killing, Amos Guiora proposes that targeted killing decisions must reflect consideration of four distinct elements: law, policy, morality, and operational details, thus ensuring that it complies with principles of domestic and international laws. The author, writing from both personal experience and an academic perspective, offers important criticism and insight into the policy as presently implemented, highlighting the need for a criteria based decision making process in defining and identifying a legitimate target. Legitimate Target, A Criteria-Based Approach to Targeted Killing blends concrete examples with a nuanced study of the current targeted killing paradigm with an emphasis on the dilemmas of morality and the law.

This book presents an interdisciplinary approach to conflict solution focusing on a very specific type of conflict, retributive conflicts . It is unique in the treatment of these and how relative measurement is used to find equilibrium solutions. The authors present an alternative process to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They do so in two ways that are different from past efforts. The first is by formally structuring the conflict and the second is the manner in which discussions were conducted and conclusions drawn. The approach will help create a solution and provide negotiators with a unique pathway to consider the thorny issues and corresponding concessions underlying the deliberations, together with their implementation. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) provides a way to conflict solution with the participation of negotiators for the parties. It is a positive approach that makes it possible to reason and express feelings and judgments with numerical intensities to derive priorities. With the assistance of panels of Israeli participants and Palestinian participants brought together in 2006 to 2017, AHP was applied for the first time in a group setting to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The process makes it clear that moderation in different degrees by both sides is essential to arrive at acceptable agreements on concessions proposed and agreed upon by both sides.

Top Ten Global Justice Law Review Articles 2008 is a thorough and accessible review of the most salient, the most controversial, and the most illuminating essays on security law in the previous calendar year. In this edition, Professor Amos Guiora presents the ten most vital and pertinent law review articles from 2008 written by both scholars who have already gained international prominence as experts in global justice as well as emerging voices in the realm of international criminal law and human rights. These articles deal with issues of terrorism, security law, environmental law, and the preservation of civil liberties in the post-9/11 world. The chosen selections derive not just from the high quality and expertise of the articles' authors, but equally from the wide diversity of legal issues addressed by those authors. Guiora combines the expertise of scholars from both eminent law schools and government agencies to provide a valuable resource for scholars and experts researching this important subject area.
This annual review provides researchers with more than just an authoritative discussion on the most prominent global justice debates of the day; it also educates researchers on new issues that have received far too little attention in the press and in academia. These expert scholars and leaders tackle and give voice to issues that range from the psychology of terrorism to the role of oil in the Sudanese genocide to the oppression of women in new Arab democracies to transnational environmental cooperation and beyond. Together, the vast knowledge and independent viewpoints represented by these ten authors make this volume, a valuable resource for individuals new to the realm of global justice and for advanced researchers with a sophisticated understanding of the field. Top Ten Global Justice Law Review Articles 2008 serves as a one-stop guidebook on how both the U.S. and the world generally are currently grappling with fundamental principles of social and political life.

This book presents an interdisciplinary approach to conflict solution focusing on a very specific type of conflict, retributive conflicts . It is unique in the treatment of these and how relative measurement is used to find equilibrium solutions. The authors present an alternative process to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They do so in two ways that are different from past efforts. The first is by formally structuring the conflict and the second is the manner in which discussions were conducted and conclusions drawn. The approach will help create a solution and provide negotiators with a unique pathway to consider the thorny issues and corresponding concessions underlying the deliberations, together with their implementation. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) provides a way to conflict solution with the participation of negotiators for the parties. It is a positive approach that makes it possible to reason and express feelings and judgments with numerical intensities to derive priorities. With the assistance of panels of Israeli participants and Palestinian participants brought together in 2006 to 2017, AHP was applied for the first time in a group setting to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The process makes it clear that moderation in different degrees by both sides is essential to arrive at acceptable agreements on concessions proposed and agreed upon by both sides.