Author(s):  
Kubo Mačák

This chapter traces the development of the law of belligerent occupation in order to identify trends relevant to the regulation of internationalized armed conflicts. It observes that despite the general grounding of this body of law in a state-centric paradigm, several isolated developments have contemplated the possibility of non-state actors becoming belligerent occupants of a portion of state territory. Moreover, the chapter highlights that the law of belligerent occupation has undergone a fundamental transformation as part of a general trend of individualization and humanization of international law. Therefore, it is no longer simply a brake on inter-state relations and a protector of states’ interests and institutions. Instead, the law has gradually brought individuals’ interests to the fore, putting persons before institutions and individuals before states. Overall, the chapter uncovers the historical reasons that support an extensive view of the applicability of the law of occupation to modern internationalized armed conflicts.


1968 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 314
Author(s):  
John W. Spellman ◽  
T. B. Mukherjee

2005 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Moul

Abstract. The usual quantitative study of inter-state war and peace tallies observations on hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dyads or pairs of states. These observations miss elementary features of inter-state relations that should be examined when testing Realist explanations of war and peace. The way in which three prominent studies (Bremer, 1992; Bueno de Mesquita, 1981; 1985) chose to count the Seven Weeks War dramatically reveals the theoretical difficulties when tallying dyads. Re-analyses of these studies demonstrate the sensitivity of the results to particulars of 1866 Germany and, more importantly, illustrate the merits of analyzing the dispute rather than the state dyad or the state-dyad year.Résumé. L'étude quantitative des périodes de guerre et de paix entre États comptabilise des observations relatives à des centaines, parfois des milliers de dyades ou paires d'États. Ces observations ne prennent pas en compte certaines caractéristiques élémentaires des relations entre États qui devraient pourtant être examinées lorsque l'on teste les théories réalistes expliquant guerre et paix. La manière dont trois études reconnues (Bremer, 1992; Bueno de Mesquita, 1981; 1985) ont choisi de comptabiliser la guerre des Sept Semaines révèle de manière éclatante les difficultés théoriques dans la comptabilisation des dyades d'états. De nouvelles analyses de ces études ont démontré la sensibilité des résultats aux caractéristiques de l'Allemagne de 1866, mais soulignent surtout les mérites de l'analyse des disputes par rapport à l'analyse des dyades d'États ou des dyades d'États annuelles.


Author(s):  
Stephen J. Kobrin

This article is concerned with only one aspect of the vast literature on MNE–state relations: the impact of the MNE on sovereignty, autonomy, and control. It argues that the mainstream literature of the sovereignty at bay era did not predict the end of the nation-state or conclude that sovereignty is critically compromised either in theory or practice. In fact, while the terms ‘sovereignty’, autonomy', and ‘control’ appear frequently in these discussions, they are rarely defined or even used precisely. At the end of the day MNEs are international or cross-border entities which are of the existing inter-state system firmly rooted in national territorial jurisdiction. The problems posed by the traditional MNE for both states and the inter-state system tend to involve issues of jurisdictional asymmetry, jurisdictional overlap and control, rather than sovereignty in its formal sense. The hierarchical or Fordist structure of the traditional MNE reinforces the core values of the modern international political system: state sovereignty and mutually exclusive territoriality.


2021 ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Michael A. Wilkinson

<Online Only>This chapter examines how post-war Europe was reconstituted through a new regional geopolitics of inter-state relations, an acknowledgement of the interdependence of internal and external domains of state action, and a change in the abstract meaning of sovereignty. Materially, inter-state relations in Europe were reconstituted through the response to the ‘German question’, extraneous factors of Cold War superpower rivalry, and the project of European integration. This was supported by constitutional developments. Domestically, these developments involved commitments to internationalism and Europeanism and the turn to counter-majoritarian institutions, disconnecting state sovereignty from popular sovereignty. Regionally, they involved the constitutionalization of the European Economic Community (EEC), cementing a functionalist ideology and depoliticization through juridical and technical avenues.</Online Only>


2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-317
Author(s):  
Natalie Sabanadze

AbstractIn October 2008, the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities adopted Bolzano/Bozen Recommendations on National Minorities in Inter-State Relations. The Recommendations demonstrate how, under what conditions and within which limits States can support minorities residing abroad. These are the HCNM's first recommendations that deal expressly with the international dimension of the minority question, which is closely linked to both domestic and international security. This article contributes to the debate on the securitization of the minority question and on the example of the Bolzano Recommendations argues for both moral and practical validity of the HCNM's approach described as 'security through justice'.


Author(s):  
C. H. Alexandrowicz

This chapter considers the work of Franciscus Seraphin de Freitas, a professor at the University of Valadolid, in particular his treatise entitled De Justo Imperio Lusitanorum Asiatico, and compares his influence to that of Hugo Grotius. Freitas and Grotius were participants in a case that arose from the seizure of a Portuguese vessel in the Straits of Malacca by a Dutch Admiral employed by the Dutch East India Company. Its capture was questioned by some Company members who opposed the adjudication of the prize by the Dutch Admiralty Court. Grotius defended the case and Freitas was chosen to state a case for the King of Spain who was also then the sovereign of Portugal. The chapter argues that Freitas deserves his due place among the writers of the seventeenth century who contributed to the clarification of problems relating to the legal status of the sea and to European–Asian inter-state relations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document