scholarly journals Introduction

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-153
Author(s):  
Silke Sahl

Like most members, I always look forward to the Association's Annual Course on International Law Librarianship. The program offers countless learning opportunities, including scholarly lectures, visits to libraries and information centers, and meetings with publishers and vendors. Last but not least, it offers the chance to meet new colleagues as well as to renew friendships and contacts with law librarians from around the world. I anticipated the 2002 Course with particular excitement, because this would be the first time that I would attend one in my own country. Indeed, it would be the first time IALL met in the United States for over a decade. Having experienced the hospitality of law librarians in many different countries over the years, I knew it would be especially meaningful to be able to welcome colleagues from abroad to the United States.

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Shaffer

In a Mexican challenge against U.S. criteria for labeling tuna products as “dolphin-safe,” the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO), on May 16, 2012, held against the United States while reversing various findings of the panel. The case was one of three WTO Appellate Body decisions issued in 2012 that interpreted and applied the key substantive provisions of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement or TBT) for the first time. Systemically, the decision is important for its interpretation of the TBT Agreement’s substantive obligations, the types of labeling that fall within the scope of the Agreement, the legitimacy of labeling based on foreign process and production methods (PPMs), and the relation of other international law to WTO law.


Author(s):  
John Linarelli ◽  
Margot E Salomon ◽  
Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah

This chapter is a study of the themes of the New International Economic Order (NIEO). It begins with the notion of justice that had been constructed in imperial law to justify empire and colonialism. The NIEO was the first time a prescription was made for justice in a global context not based on domination of one people over another. In its consideration of the emergence of a new notion of justice in international law, the chapter discusses the reasons for the origins of the NIEO, and goes on to describe the principles of the NIEO and the extent to which they came into conflict with dominant international law as accepted by the United States and European states. Next the chapter deals with the rise of the neoliberal ideology that led to the displacement of the NIEO and examines the issue of whether the NIEO and its ideals have passed or whether they continue to be or should be influential in international law. Finally, the chapter turns to the ideas of the NIEO alongside new efforts at promoting a fuller account of justice by which to justify and evaluate international law.


1963 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-230

The Security Council discussed this question at its 1022nd–1025th meetings, on October 23–25, 1962. It had before it a letter dated October 22, 1962, from the permanent representative of the United States, in which it was stated that the establishment of missile bases in Cuba constituted a grave threat to the peace and security of the world; a letter of the same date from the permanent representative of Cuba, claiming that the United States naval blockade of Cuba constituted an act of war; and a letter also dated October 22 from the deputy permanent representative of the Soviet Union, emphasizing that Soviet assistance to Cuba was exclusively designed to improve Cuba's defensive capacity and that the United States government had committed a provocative act and an unprecedented violation of international law in its blockade.


1934 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 555-559
Author(s):  
William L. Rodgers

At the recent annual dinner of the American Society of International Law I listened with much interest to the eloquent and impassioned address of Judge Florence E. Allen, of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, asserting that the conservation of peace has not hitherto been, and should be made, the principal objective in the development of international law. I think that her views might be summarized not unfairly in the form of a syllogism. Undeniable is its major premise that war is cruel, costly in life and resources, full of horror—a terrible infliction on those who resort to it. The minor premise is that means exist and others may be discovered whereby disputes may always be settled and peace enforced without recourse to war. And so comes the conclusion that all these means should be sought for, discovered and used, after which war will be unnecessary and will disappear from the world, leaving us under the rule of perpetual physical peace, no matter what may be the mental and emotional differences between nations.


Subject The outlook for China-Taiwan relations. Significance Taiwan’s China-sceptic government is benefiting from its spectacular success against COVID-19, Western support for its participation in the World Health Assembly against Beijing’s wishes and China's recent decision to let state security agents operate openly in Hong Kong for the first time -- a move that undermines the city’s promised autonomy. Impacts Taiwan’s international aid for battling COVID-19 will build support from key partners, especially the United States and European countries. China will block Taiwan’s participation in international organisations at any level during Tsai’s second term. As Taiwan focuses on unofficial relationships with major democracies, China will continue to whittle away at Taiwan’s official allies.


1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon A. Christenson

In the merits phase of decision in the case brought by Nicaragua against the United States, the World Court briefly mentions references by states or publicists to the concept of jus cogens. These expressions are used to buttress the Court’s conclusion that the principle prohibiting the use of force found in Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter is also a rule of customary international law.


2004 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. John Ikenberry

The United States dominates the world as no state has. It emerged from the Cold War the world's only superpower, and no geopolitical or ideological contenders are in sight. Europe is drawn inward and Japan is stagnant. A half-century after their occupation, the United States still provides security and garrisons troops in Japan and Germany – the world's second and third largest economies. US military bases and carrier battle groups ring the world. Russia is in a quasi-formal security partnership with the United States, and China has accommodated itself to US dominance, at least for the moment. For the first time in the modern era, the world's most powerful state can operate on the global stage without the counterbalancing constraints of other great powers. We have entered the American unipolar age.


Author(s):  
Mogami Toshiki

This chapter examines international law in Japan. It begins by looking at Japan’s embroilment with international law in the course of its efforts to revise the unequal treaties which had been concluded with about a dozen Occidental states while Japan was categorized as one of the ‘barbarian’ states in the world. After gradually overcoming this unequal status, it became a late-coming big power around the end of World War I. This big power then plunged into World War II, with the result that it was then branded an aggressor state and was penalized in an international tribunal. After that defeat, it turned into both a serious complier of new—that is, post-World War II—international law and a state deeply obedient to the United States. These factors have brought about complex international law behaviour as well as serious constraints in Japan’s choice of international law action.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will Smiley

Writing for his fellow military officers in early 1903, United States Army Major C.J. Crane reflected on the recent Philippine–American War. The bloody struggle to suppress an insurgency in the Philippines after the United States had annexed them from Spain in 1899 had officially concluded the previous July. The war had been accompanied by fierce racist sentiments among Americans, and in keeping with these, Crane described his foes as “the most treacherous people in the world.” But Crane's discussion drew as much on concepts of law as it did on race. The average American officer, Crane argued, had “remembered all the time that he was struggling with an enemy who was not entitled to the privileges usually granted prisoners of war,” and could be summarily executed, without benefit of “court-martial or other regular tribunal.” If anything, the Americans had been too generous. “Many [American] participants in the struggle,” he maintained, “have failed to fully understand that we were practically fighting an Asiatic nation in arms and almost every man a soldier in disguise and a violator” of the laws of war. But what did those laws mean to the United States during the conflict, and what does this indicate about the broader history of international law's relationship to empire?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document