Robert Beck's study focuses principally on two related questions. First, how did the Reagan administration decide to launch the invasion of Grenada? And second, what role did international law play in that decision? The Grenada Invasion draws on extensive interviews and correspondence with key participants-and on the recently published memoirs of those who participated in or witnessed the administration's deliberations-in order to render a new and more complete picture of Operation "Urgent Fury" decisionmaking. Beck concludes that international law did not determine policy, but that it acted briefly as a restraint and then as a justification for action.

When the United Nations Charter was adopted in 1945, states established a legal `paradigm' for regulating the recourse to armed force. In the years since then, however, significant developments have challenged the paradigm's validity, causing a `pardigmatic shift'. International Law and the Use of Force traces this shift and explores its implications for contemporary international law and practice.

Robert Beck's study focuses principally on two related questions. First, how did the Reagan administration decide to launch the invasion of Grenada? And second, what role did international law play in that decision? The Grenada Invasion draws on extensive interviews and correspondence with key participants-and on the recently published memoirs of those who participated in or witnessed the administration's deliberations-in order to render a new and more complete picture of Operation "Urgent Fury" decisionmaking. Beck concludes that international law did not determine policy, but that it acted briefly as a restraint and then as a justification for action.

When the United Nations Charter was adopted in 1945, states established a legal "paradigm" for regulating the recourse to armed force. In the years since then, however, significant developments have challenged the paradigm's validity, causing a paradigmatic shift. "International Law and the Use of Force" traces this shift and explores its implications for contemporary international law and practice.

Understanding International Law through Moot Courts: Genocide, Torture, Habeas Corpus, Chemical Weapons, and the Responsibility to Protect consists of five sets of opposing legal briefs and judge's decisions for five moot court cases held before the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. Each moot court brief included in the book addresses contemporary controversies in international affairs; issues ranging from the application of the newly emerging Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, to the torture of detainees, to the derogation from international due process protections. These moot court briefs and case judgments help students formulate legal arguments that will be applicable to other similar cases. They also provide students with excellent sources of international and domestic law, as well as greater comprehension of topics ranging from jurisdictional disputes to matters of evidence. Chapter 1 of the book provides an overview of the book as well as instructions regarding the construction of a moot court. Chapter two, by George Andreopoulos discusses the interrelationship between human rights and international criminal law. Chapters 3 through 7 are the cases. The introduction to each chapter (and subsequently each case) lays out the facts of the case in question, discusses (where applicable) issues associated with the material and contextual elements of the crimes(s) in question, provides additional topics for classroom discussion, and also places the issues of contention between the parties within the broader context of foreign affairs and international relations. After each set of briefs and legal judgments is an appendix which includes an example moot court, as well as an appendix that includes a set of alterable facts that students and faculty could adopt to change the general legal argument of the particular case.

Understanding International Law through Moot Courts: Genocide, Torture, Habeas Corpus, Chemical Weapons, and the Responsibility to Protect consists of five sets of opposing legal briefs and judge's decisions for five moot court cases held before the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. Each moot court brief included in the book addresses contemporary controversies in international affairs; issues ranging from the application of the newly emerging Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, to the torture of detainees, to the derogation from international due process protections. These moot court briefs and case judgments help students formulate legal arguments that will be applicable to other similar cases. They also provide students with excellent sources of international and domestic law, as well as greater comprehension of topics ranging from jurisdictional disputes to matters of evidence. Chapter 1 of the book provides an overview of the book as well as instructions regarding the construction of a moot court. Chapter two, by George Andreopoulos discusses the interrelationship between human rights and international criminal law. Chapters 3 through 7 are the cases. The introduction to each chapter (and subsequently each case) lays out the facts of the case in question, discusses (where applicable) issues associated with the material and contextual elements of the crimes(s) in question, provides additional topics for classroom discussion, and also places the issues of contention between the parties within the broader context of foreign affairs and international relations. After each set of briefs and legal judgments is an appendix which includes an example moot court, as well as an appendix that includes a set of alterable facts that students and faculty could adopt to change the general legal argument of the particular case.

Among the significant consequences of the Cold War's end have been the rise of nations and the challenges that these nations pose for global order and international law. Taking a unique approach to explore this phenomenon, Beck and Ambrosio consider three principal themes: the emergence of nations, the international legal challenges that such nations pose, and international legal efforts to accommodate nations within the global state system.

International Rules brings together exemplary works from the most prominent approaches to international rules of International Law and International Relations disciplines. Included are chapters on Natural Law, Legal Positivism, Classical Realism, the New Haven School, Institutionalism, Structural Realism, the New Stream, and Feminist Voices. Each of the eight chapters begins with a brief overview, offers a representative work or works, and concludes with a selected bibliography. From Hugo Grotius to David Kennedy, from George Kennan to Robert Keohane, the featured authors provide valuable insights into their common subject: international rules. Despite divergent methods and objectives, they address fundamentally the same questions: What is the nature of such rules? What is their purpose? How do they originate? What role, if any, do they play in politics? Framing the selections assembled are two original chapter-length essays. The first chapter of this volume assesses the prospects for interdisciplinary collaboration; the final one suggests a direction for future research.