Article
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.
Capable and Culpable? The United States, RtoP, and Refugee Responsibility-Sharing
In this feature, Alise Coen takes as given that facilitating refugee protection represents an essential step towards upholding the norm of RtoP. By examining the past policy decisions of the United States, the article argues for culpability as a criterion for assessing responsibilities to refugees, and shows how upholding these responsibilities can align with state interests.
Trials as Messages of Justice: What Should Be Expected of International Criminal Courts?
After more than a decade of work, the accomplishments of the International Criminal Court are highly contested. In this article, the authors ask, what can and should we expect from international criminal courts? How can international trial and punishment constitute a suitable response to episodes of mass violence?
Self-Interest and the Distant Vulnerable
What interests do states have in assisting and protecting vulnerable populations beyond their borders? Today, confronted as we are with civil wars, mass atrocities, and humanitarian catastrophes that have cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians and generated the displacement of sixty million more, this question is as urgent as it has ever been.
