Diálogos militares by Diego García de Palacio: The first American work on the law of nations

1992 ◽  
Vol 32 (290) ◽  
pp. 446-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Valencia Villa

Over the years the Americas have made significant contributions to the development of international humanitarian law. These include three nineteenth-century texts which constitute the earliest modern foundations of the law of armed conflict. The first is a treaty, signed on 26 November 1820 by the liberator Simón Bolívar and the peacemaker Pablo Morillo, which applied the rules of international conflict to a civil war. The second is a Spanish-American work entitled Principios de Derecho de Genres (Principles of the Law of Nations), which was published in 1832 by Andrés Bello. This work dealt systematically with the various aspects and consequences of war. The third is a legal instrument, signed on 24 April 1863 by United States President Abraham Lincoln, which codified the first body of law on internal conflict under the heading “Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field” (General Orders No. 100). This instrument, known as the Lieber Code, was adopted as the new code of conduct for the armies of the Union during the American Civil War.

1912 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-85
Author(s):  
James Brown Scott ◽  
George F. Seward

It is common knowledge that the United States was originally settled either by God-fearing men and women fleeing from persecution, or by political refugees who were unable to bring about reforms which they believed essential to good government and were unwilling to comply with the state of affaire existing in the Old World, or, finally, by those who, unfortunate at home, were desirous of bettering their condition in the New World. The Pilgrim and the Puritan, the Episcopalian and the Catholic, the Quaker, the Presbyterian and the Lutheran settled the Atlantic Coast. The roundhead and the cavalier, the rich and the poor and the inmate of the debtor’s prison found themselves side by side upon a plane of equality without the traditions and the conservatism of an older world. Whether the colony was composed of Puritans and manifested intolerance to the protestant brother of a different faith; whether the settlement remained loyal to the Church of England, as Virginia, or favored the Catholic, as Maryland, or freely accepted the law-abiding without questioning his religion, as the Quakers of Pennsylvania, the principle of religious toleration steadily gained ground, and by the time of the Revolution it may be said generally that religious differences ceased to influence men or their conduct toward each other, by virtue of a conception of liberty which embraced not merely the right to and protection of property but the freedom of thought, of speech and of public worship. The example of Virginia, which in 1786 established religious freedom by statute, profoundly influenced the Federal Government and the various States of the Union; for, by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, it is provided that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and the States of the American Union have, in their various Constitutions, placed the same restriction upon their legislatures. The amendment of the Constitution and the like provisions in State Constitutions were not dictated by indifference or hostility to the principles of the Christian religion, but aimed to prevent not merely the establishment of any one form of religion, however widely spread, but to establish upon a firm footing the right before the law of every religious sect.


1927 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 529-536
Author(s):  
Frank O. Lowden

The tendency of all government is toward bureaucracy. The government official is inclined to exaggerate the importance of his office. He is constantly tempted to expand its scope. He is properly jealous of his authority. He looks askance upon the activities of other officials who seem to be trespassing upon his ground. In his construction of the law he is prone to insist upon the letter which killeth but to overlook the spirit which giveth life.I think that this tendency is inevitable. It is inseparable from zeal and pride, and these qualities are essential to successful administration. Where, however, the enterprise is a vast one, as in government, or as in a great business organization, these tendencies, if left uncontrolled, are likely to inflict serious injury upon the service. There will be constant friction among the various subdivisions of the particular department. At times the activities of one will neutralize the activities of the other. A set of arbitrary rules is likely to be evolved which will vex everyone who comes in contact with the particular bureau. The original purpose of the creation of the bureau is finally lost sight of, and it is likely to seem to those who direct it an end and not a means.


Author(s):  
Simone Zurbuchen

This chapter aims to explain why considering Vattel as a founding father of positivism rests on a misunderstanding. Despite the continuous attention Vattel received in the scholarly literature as well as in the diplomatic and juridical practice, especially in the United States, his legacy remained highly contested ever since his treatise The Law of Nations was first published in 1758. One reason is its indebtedness to the modern natural law tradition but also to Vattel’s originality, mainly due to the significance he attributed to the sovereign state as a free and independent member of the society of nations. Vattel established many dualisms to develop his very broad notion of the law of nations: he applied the law of nations to the ‘political system’ of Europe, which he considered a kind of republic instituted for maintaining order and liberty and founded on the scheme of the balance of power.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-196
Author(s):  
A. A. Manukhin

In the present paper the author continues the study of the challenges faced by Colombia in its struggle to overcome the internal armed conflict, as well as the role of the United States in this process. By 2010 the confrontation between the government forces and the armed rebels had reached a breaking point opening the way to a successful conclusion of the Government of Colombia–FARC peace negotiations and the beginning of the country’s post-conflict reconstruction. The paper thoroughly examines the negotiations process, identifies the key disputed issues and the measures outlined for their resolution, including mechanisms of transitional justice, agrarian reform, programmes for demobilization and reintegration of the former combatants. The results of these talks laid the foundation for the historic Peace Accord of September 26, 2016. However, against all hopes and expectations, the agreement failed to bring an end to the long-standing internal conflict in Colombia. The failure of the national referendum, which was designed to approve the agreement, not only revealed deep divisions in the society, but forced the government to make serious concessions to the opponents of the negotiations with FARC. The author emphasizes the growing erosion of the hard-won consensus in the Colombian society, accompanied by the consolidation of the right-wing conservative camp. In this context the role of external sponsors of the peaceful agreement in general and the United States in particular becomes crucial. The paper presents a comparative analysis of approaches to providing aid to Colombia demonstrated by the administrations of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. The author concludes that despite substantial differences, for both administrations the ultimate objective was national security of the United States. That was clearly demonstrated by the fact that the US foreign aid to Colombia focused primarily on the fight against the illegal production of and trafficking in drugs, while the issues of peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction received less attention. Assessing Colombia’s experience in overcoming the internal conflict and the role of the United States in that process, the author concludes that although prioritization of security issues may have a considerable organizing potential, at the same time it may be detrimental to the process of post-conflict reconstruction in general.


1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry J. Bourguignon

In an article published in this Journal in 1932, Professor Edwin Dickinson pointed out that the Supreme Court, in the first thirty years of its existence, dealt with 82 cases which raised questions of international law. The Court and counsel before it repeatedly cited the familiar writers on the law of nations: Grotius, Pufendorf, Bynkershoek, Burlamaqui, Rutherforth, and Vattel. As Dickinson pointed out, “It is an ancient doctrine of the Anglo-American common law that the law of nations is incorporated in and in some sense forms part of the national law.” Largely through decisions based on the principles expressed by the classical writers, the law of nations was early incorporated as part of the law of the United States.


2014 ◽  
Vol 69 (02) ◽  
pp. 311-339
Author(s):  
Nicolas Barreyre

Abstract With its victory in the Civil War, the Union affirmed the primacy of the national sovereignty of the United States. After the conflict, the country was absorbed by the consequences of this momentous event. Yet, even in this context, the monetary policies of the government became contentious and led to the eventual redefinition of sovereignty. This article explores how the American institutional structure and political system allowed the money question to become a spatial issue, opposing the great sections of the country. In turn, this sectionalism triggered a confrontation between alternative understandings of what sovereignty entailed in terms of both political legitimacy and spatial scales. By the end of the century, the scope of sovereign power would be redefined, and currency abandoned as one of its instruments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document