Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 16 items for :

  • "sovereignty" x
  • Manchester Security, Conflict & Peace x
Clear All
Setting the precedent

This book is an attempt at a comprehensive presentation of the history of humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century, the heyday of this controversial doctrine. It starts with a brief presentation of the present situation and debate. The theoretical first part of the book starts with the genealogy of the idea, namely the quest for the progenitors of the idea in the sixteenth and seventeenth century which is a matter of controversy. Next the nineteenth century ‘civilization-barbarity’ dichotomy is covered and its bearing on humanitarian intervention, with its concomitant Eurocentric/Orientalist gaze towards the Ottomans and other states, concluding with the reaction of the Ottomans (as well as the Chinese and Japanese). Then the pivotal international law dimension is scrutinized, with the arguments of advocates and opponents of humanitarian intervention from the 1830s until the 1930s. The theoretical part of the book concludes with nineteenth century international political theory and intervention (Kant, Hegel, Cobden, Mazzini and especially J.S. Mill). In the practical second part of the book four cases studies of humanitarian intervention are examined in considerable detail: the Greek case (1821-1831), the Lebanon/Syria case (1860-61), the Balkan crisis and Bulgarian case (1875-78) in two chapters, and the U.S. intervention in Cuba (1895-98). Each cases study concludes with its bearing on the evolution of international norms and rules of conduct in instances of humanitarian plights. The concluding chapter identifies the main characteristics of intervention on humanitarian grounds during this period and today’s criticism and counter-criticism.

Sharon Weinblum

broader narratives on mobility, security, sovereignty, and the regime boundaries in Israel. By its object, this chapter is thus also complementary to the important set of studies focused on the border-mobility nexus. However, while these studies have mostly addressed the border either through the prism of exception (Doty 2003 ; Jones 2009 ; Salter 2008 ) or through a Foucauldian lens focused on

in Security/ Mobility
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

human rights, there was no international legal ban on acts of inhumanity by states, and sovereignty and independence, including the norm of non-intervention, were the cornerstones of international law. On the other hand, aggressive war was permitted and was a manifestation of sovereignty. 13 The ‘paradoxical outcome’ was that ‘the greater threat to the integrity of states (waging war) was widely regarded as legitimate, but the lesser (intervention) was not’; 14 thus

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Just war and against tyranny
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

reasons for a just war. The just war ( bellum justum ) doctrine has its origins in ancient Greek and Roman thought, and was developed in early Christian and more specifically medieval Catholic thinking. This first normative phase regarding war was followed by the period between the Peace of Westphalia (1648) until 1918 in which waging war, even without a pretext, was deemed an attribute of state sovereignty. 1 It consisted mainly of jus ad

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

if he were a Marxist) that it has been used as ‘an ideological instrument of imperialist expansion, and in its ethical-humanitarian form it is a specific vehicle of economic imperialism … whoever invokes humanity wants to cheat’. 4 The question of intervention for humanitarian reasons poses agonizing dilemmas. There is the tension between the sanctity of life (saving human beings) and the veneration of sovereignty and independence; and there is the tension between

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Open Access (free)
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

assumed that the non-intervention norm was established in the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). In fact non-intervention was established as a principle of international law in the first half of the eighteenth century by jurists Christian Wolff and Emer de Vattel. 9 Thereafter non-intervention became a fully fledged legal principle associated with the principles of sovereignty and independence. Half a century later, Kant lent considerable weight to this new norm in his quest for principles

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
A discourse view on the European Community and the abolition of border controls in the second half of the 1980s
Stef Wittendorp

fixtures. As Alison Mountz argues, ‘borders are always in a state of becoming, their conceptualization remains provisional in nature’ (Johnson et al. 2011 : 65). Accounts of bordering also moved away from the idea of borders as strictly territorial markers of state sovereignty. Borders are considered legal, social, political, and cultural markers that emerge across and inside territories (Parker and

in Security/ Mobility
Analysing the example of data territorialisation
Andreas Baur-Ahrens

. National routing initiatives In the empirical part of this chapter, I analyse data territorialisation and the resulting changes in power relations. The trend of data territorialisation, often called ‘data sovereignty’, 2 is defined by Dana Polatin-Reuben and Joss Wright ( 2014 : 1) as ‘a catch-all term to describe different state behaviours towards data generated in or passing through

in Security/ Mobility
Open Access (free)
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

lead to unfettered independence. Criticism and counter-criticism Supporters of the nineteenth-century precedent point to many commonalities with today’s landscape. As Gary Bass has argued: 3 All of the major themes of today’s heated debates about humanitarian intervention – about undermining sovereignty … about altruistic or veiled imperialistic motivations

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

society. 8 Charles Alexandrowicz has argued that the shrinking of international society’s scope to ‘Eurocentrism’ was due to the switch from natural law, which was universal, to positivism, with its emphasis on treaty law, sovereignty, international personality and recognition (as constitutive of statehood) confined to the so-called ‘civilized states’ as original members of the ‘family of nations’. 9 This is arguable, for many nineteenth century jurists

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century