Article
Rising Powers, Responsibility, and International Society
This article examines statements made by rising powers Brazil, China, and India in UN Security Council meetings between 2011 and 2016 to identify their perspectives on which international actors are responsible and what constitutes responsible action. Gaskarth then analyzes these statements in light of English School theory on responsibility and international society.
Climate Engineering and the Playing God Critique
The “playing God” critique charges that humans should not undertake to control nature in ways that overstep the proper scope of human agency. In this article, Laura M. Hartman explores the way this critique is used with respect to geoengineering, and concludes that climate interventions should be based on contextual awareness and responsive, communal responsibility.
“Utopian in the Right Sense”: The Responsibility to Protect and the Logical Necessity of Reform
In this article, Aidan Hehir writes that claims made about the success of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) echo the pejorative conceptions of “utopianism” as advanced by E. H. Carr and Ken Booth. In order to revive RtoP, Hehir suggests a potential reform of the existing international legal order that meets Carr’s preference for normative thinking that is “utopian in the right sense.”
Pro Mundo Mori? The Problem of Cosmopolitan Motivation in War
In this feature article, Lior Erez explores the problem of motivating soldiers to fight in cosmopolitan wars. First, he argues that the problem is best framed as a political one rather than an ethical or meta-ethical one. Then, he goes on to suggest how states might close the gap between cosmopolitan demands and soldiers’ motivations, evaluating a range of options.
Legitimate Authority and the Ethics of War: A Map of the Terrain
In this article, Jonathan Parry challenges both the traditional conception of the legitimate authority criterion as well as those reductivists who reject it wholesale. Specifically, he offers a qualified defense of the authority requirement on reductivists’ own terms.
Does Who Matter? Legal Authority and the Use of Military Violence
In this article, Pål Wrange demonstrates that in international law there is no consistent, over-arching conception of proper authority. Instead, he concludes, there exists authority to do different things for different purposes, allocated to a variety of actors who base their authority on a multitude of characteristics.
The Perspective of the Rebel: A Gap in the Global Normative Architecture
In this article, Christopher Finlay writes that the failure to take account of what he calls the “Rebel Perspective” constitutes a source of instability within the global normative architecture governing the use of force. Because this architecture is nevertheless valuable, he proposes some suggestions for strengthening it by incorporating the Rebel Perspective.
Shame on EU? Europe, RtoP, and the Politics of Refugee Protection
In this feature, Dan Bulley argues that there is little to be gained by invoking the RtoP norm in the context of the refugee crisis. Rather than bolstering the EU’s protection mechanisms, RtoP effectively authorizes the EU’s current treatment of refugees.
