International Law as a Language for International Relations. Le Droit international comme langage des relations internationales. El Derecho internacional como lenguaje de las relaciones internacionales. (Proceedings of the United Nations Congress on Public International Law, New York, March 13–17, 1995.) The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International, 1996. Pp. xvi, 675. Fl 395; $257; £174.

1997 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 769-770
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Droit International

BOOK REVIEWSBOOK REVIEWSHeinzeEricDr26Faculty of Laws, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London26The author wishes to thank Peter Fitzpatrick and Istvan Pogany for their valuable comments.081999462269276Schulte-TenckhoffI., La question des peuples autochtones, Bruylant, Brussels 1997, x + 235 pp., BFr. 540/FF 90.Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 19991999T.M.C. Asser PresspdfS0165070X00002461a.pdfdispartBook Reviews1.For a classic statement, see ‘Reparations for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations’, ICJ Rep. (1949) p. 174 (11 April). See also, e.g., HailbronnerK., ‘Der Staat und der Einzelne als Völkerrechtssubjekte’, in VitzthumW. Graf, ed., Völkerrecht (Berlin, De Gruyter 1997) pp. 181, 188–204; JenningsR. and WattsA., Oppenheim's International Law, Vol. 1, 9th edn. (London, Longmann 1992).2.See, e.g., Hailbronner, op. cit. n. 1, p. 196; Jennings and Watts, op. cit. n. 1, pp. 162–162; Nguyen Quoc Dinh, et al., Droit international public, 5th edn. (Paris, Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence 1994) pp. 166–167,497–499.3.In addition to the work reviewed here, see, e.g., AnayaJ., Indigenous Peoples in International Law (New York, Oxford University Press 1996); TenantC., ‘Indigenous Peoples, International Institutions and the International Legal Literature from 1945 to 1993

1999 ◽  
Vol 46 (02) ◽  
pp. 269
Author(s):  
Eric Heinze
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Droit International ◽  
Peuples Autochtones

scholarly journals 2000–2020: twenty years later, where are we in terms of the unity of international law?

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-23
Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Peremptory Norms ◽  
International Rule

Twenty years have passed since the author's delivery in 2000 of the general course of public international law at the Hague Academy of International Law, titled ‘The Unity of the International Legal Order’. That course was designed to combat the all-too-common idea that international law was in the process of ‘fragmentation’. It did so by developing a theory focused on the existence of and tension between two forms of unity in the international legal order: the formal unity (concerning the procedures by which primary norms are created and interpreted, and their non-compliance adjudicated) and the material unity (based on the content of certain norms of general international law, peremptory norms). Twenty years later, the time is ripe to revisit this theory to determine the extent to which it is still valid as a framework for the analysis of international law, particularly as an increasing number of ‘populist’ leaders very much seem to ignore, or voluntarily deny, the validity of some of the key substantial principles on which the international legal order was re-founded within and around the United Nations in 1945. When confronted with the factual reality of the present state of international relations as well as with the evolution of the law, one can conclude that the validity of the unity of the international legal order is unfailingly maintained, and that its role in upholding the international rule of law is more important now than ever.

scholarly journals Implementation in practice: The use of force to protect civilians in United Nations peacekeeping

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 458-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingvild Bode ◽  
John Karlsrud
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Member States ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Peacekeeping ◽  
Normative Foundations

Since the failures of the United Nations of the early 1990s, the protection of civilians has evolved as a new norm for United Nations peacekeeping operations. However, a 2014 United Nations report found that while peacekeeping mandates often include the use of force to protect civilians, this has routinely been avoided by member states. What can account for this gap between the apparently solid normative foundations of the protection of civilians and the wide variation in implementation? This article approaches the question by highlighting normative ambiguity as a fundamental feature of international norms. Thereby, we consider implementation as a political, dynamic process where the diverging understandings that member states hold with regard to the protection of civilians norm manifest and emerge. We visualize this process in combining a critical-constructivist approach to norms with practice theories. Focusing on the practices of member states’ military advisers at the United Nations headquarters in New York, and their positions on how the protection of civilians should be implemented on the ground, we draw attention to their agency in norm implementation at an international site. Military advisers provide links between national ministries and contingents in the field, while also competing for being recognized as competent performers of appropriate implementation practices. Drawing on an interpretivist analysis of data generated through an online survey, a half-day workshop and interviews with selected delegations, the article adds to the understanding of norms in international relations while also providing empirical insights into peacekeeping effectiveness.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-111
Author(s):  
Marian Nash
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On September 8, 1992, President George Bush transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted at New York on May 9, 1992, by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change and signed on behalf of the United States at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro on June 12, 1992.

The United Nations International Law Commission

1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-126
Author(s):  
Robert W. Schaaf
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Legal Questions ◽  
Postal Services ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Those seeking information on the United Nations’ work in systematizing the rules of public international law may find it useful to examine the latest edition of The Work of the International Law Commission (4th ed., United Nations, 1988). According to this publication, (the primary source for this column), interest in the development and codification of the rules on international law may be traced back to the late 18th century and the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, author of Principles of International Law. From this time forward there were numerous attempts at the codification of international law, but intergovernmental regulation of general legal questions originated with the Congress of Vienna (1814–1815). Thereafter, international legal rules on various subjects were developed by different diplomatic conferences. These included such subjects as the laws of war on land and sea, pacific settlement of international disputes and the regulation of postal services and telecommunications. The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907 stimulated the movement for codification. Efforts to promote the codification and development of international law were further advanced with the 1924 (September 22) resolution of the fifth session of the League of Nations Assembly which envisaged the establishment of a standing Committee of Experts for the Progressive Codification of International Law. After having consulted member governments and the Council, the League Assembly decided in 1927 to convene a Codification Conference which took place at The Hague in the Spring of 1930. Unfortunately, the international instruments resulting from the work of the conference were only in the one field of nationality. One further step, however, was the adoption by the League Assembly on September 25, 1931 of a major resolution on codification of international law emphasizing the need to strengthen the influence of governments at each stage in the codification process.

The Effects of a State of War or Armed Conflict

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Mancini
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The United Nations

This chapter explores how a state of war or armed conflict affects the relations between belligerents, between belligerents and third states, and the belligerents’ subjects. It begins by describing how a state of war arose between two states, along with its far-reaching consequences, in classical international law. The effects on diplomatic relations, trade relations, treaties, and contracts are highlighted. The chapter then considers the prohibition on the use or threat of armed force in international relations and its implications for the concept of a state of war as well as the consequences traditionally attached to it. It also looks at state practice regarding the creation of a state of war in the United Nations era and concludes by analysing the effects of an interstate armed conflict in contemporary international law.

scholarly journals The Legality Of Nato'S Action In The Former Republic Of Yugoslavia (Fry) Under International Law

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 910-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

The use of force has been prohibited in international relations since at least the United Nations Charter, 1945. Article 2 (4) of the Charter states:All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the United Nations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document