The purpose of this text is to evaluate the extent to which international judicial institutions-principally the four most prominent tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the International Criminal Court- have proven effective in advancing human security. It examines the processes of international justice, the judicial outcomes of these institutions, and the more long-range impact of their work on human rights and peace to assess their consequences in the affected nations as well as the international community.

The purpose of this text is to evaluate the extent to which international judicial institutions-principally the four most prominent tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the International Criminal Court- have proven effective in advancing human security. It examines the processes of international justice, the judicial outcomes of these institutions, and the more long-range impact of their work on human rights and peace to assess their consequences in the affected nations as well as the international community.

For decades a bitter civil war between the Colombia government and armed insurgent groups tore apart Colombian society. After protracted negotiations in Havana, a peace agreement was accepted by the Colombian government and the FARC rebel group in 2016. This volume will provide academics and practitioners throughout the world with critical analyses regarding what we know generally about the post-war peace building process and how this can be applied to the specifics of the Colombian case to assist in the design and implementation of post-war peace building programs and policies. This unique group of Colombian and international scholars comment on critical aspects of the peace process in Colombia, transitional justice mechanisms, the role of state and non-state actors at the national and local levels, and examine what the Colombian case reveals about traditional theories and approaches to peace and transitional justice.

Taiwan faces many of the same challenges as most newly democratized nations such as the legacy of an authoritarian government, a traditional culture, ethnic division and non-majoritarian political institutions. Each chapter in this volume sheds light on the democratization process. The contributors examine questions concerning the state of political trust, ethnicity, democratic values and political institutions. In the post-Cold War era when America's foreign policy is focusing on how best to foster democratic transition throughout the world, the lessons that can be learned from Taiwan's democratization impart valuable lessons to students and scholars.

For decades a bitter civil war between the Colombia government and armed insurgent groups tore apart Colombian society. After protracted negotiations in Havana, a peace agreement was accepted by the Colombian government and the FARC rebel group in 2016. This volume will provide academics and practitioners throughout the world with critical analyses regarding what we know generally about the post-war peace building process and how this can be applied to the specifics of the Colombian case to assist in the design and implementation of post-war peace building programs and policies. This unique group of Colombian and international scholars comment on critical aspects of the peace process in Colombia, transitional justice mechanisms, the role of state and non-state actors at the national and local levels, and examine what the Colombian case reveals about traditional theories and approaches to peace and transitional justice.

This book demonstrates how, after many years of inactivity after the World War II tribunals, judges at the Yugoslav, Rwanda and Sierra Leone tribunals, and to a lesser extent the International Criminal Court, have seized the opportunity to develop international law on war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Meernik and Aloisi argue that judges are motivated by a concern for human rights protection and the legacy of international criminal justice. They have progressively expanded the reach of international law to protect human rights and have used the power of their own words to condemn human rights atrocities. Judges have sentenced the guilty to lengthy and predictable terms in prison to provide justice, deterrence of future violations and even to advance peace and reconciliation. On judgment day, we show that judges have sought to enhance the power of international justice.

The United States utilizes a vast arsenal of foreign policy tools to induce, compel, and deter changes in other nations' foreign policies. Traditionally, U.S. foreign policy research focuses on the degree of success the U.S. Government has achieved when seeking specific objectives such as improvements in human rights conditions, democratic change, trade policies, and a host of other goals. In this Letort Paper, the author analyzes the extent to which intrastate and interstate conflict and terrorism in other nations are influenced by the depth and breadth of their military and foreign policy relationships with the United States. More specifically, he empirically analyzes the degree to which U.S. military and foreign policies such as the stationing of U.S. military personnel; the use of military force; the provision of foreign assistance, as well as a more general similarity of foreign policy interests between the United States and a foreign regime are statistically related to interstate and intrastate conflict and terrorist activity. The paper will better enable policymakers to identify which nations are most likely to become potential threats to American interests, and determine which mix of policy options works best in preventing the outbreak of terrorism and conflict within and among nations.

This book demonstrates how, after many years of inactivity after the World War II tribunals, judges at the Yugoslav, Rwanda and Sierra Leone tribunals, and to a lesser extent the International Criminal Court, have seized the opportunity to develop international law on war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Meernik and Aloisi argue that judges are motivated by a concern for human rights protection and the legacy of international criminal justice. They have progressively expanded the reach of international law to protect human rights and have used the power of their own words to condemn human rights atrocities. Judges have sentenced the guilty to lengthy and predictable terms in prison to provide justice, deterrence of future violations and even to advance peace and reconciliation. On judgment day, we show that judges have sought to enhance the power of international justice.