Skip to main content

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

4. Contestation in the Non-intervention Norm

verfasst von : Betcy Jose

Erschienen in: Norm Contestation

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

As declared by the International Court of Justice, the non-intervention norm is one of the most foundational norms in international relations today (International Court of Justice 1969). The non-intervention norm governs a variety of inter-state behavior, from official public statements to the use of force, which can intrude on a state’s domestic affairs. It is widely accepted among the global community of states. This chapter focuses specifically on how the norm regulates the use of inter-state force and its exceptions. One exception in particular permits states to use force against another state for humanitarian purposes. This exception has yet to be codified in international law, yet, historically and currently, state practice suggests a general acceptance that the parameters of the non-intervention norm allow for these humanitarian exceptions. However, much as is the case with the civilian immunity norm, ambiguity has plagued the non-intervention norm, impeding intersubjective agreement and generating contestation. This chapter illustrates these dynamics by first providing a historical overview of the norm and its humanitarian exceptions as well as the ambiguity contained within them. It then discusses dominant explanations for non-compliance with the norm, highlighting their assumption of intersubjective agreement among normative actors. The chapter continues with a discussion of how the logics of appropriateness, practicality, and contestedness within the norm contestation framework utilized here apply to the non-intervention norm and humanitarian intervention. This discussion is then followed by an exploration of how the norm contestation framework contributes to our understanding of the global discussion on Russia’s actions in Crimea as captured by the global media and official statements. It does so by illustrating how despite its long-held embrace of the norm and the idea of humanitarian intervention, Russia’s attempts to justify the Crimean intervention revealed an understanding of the norm which greatly differed from those held by the norm enforcer. The chapter continues by arguing that Russia’s willingness to maintain a commitment to this particular normative understanding was more indicative of the logic of appropriateness informed by the logic of contestedness and the logic of practicality than the logic of consequences.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
Recall that norms have prescriptions and parameters. This chapter addresses the non-intervention norm’s parameters which “indicate under which situation the norm’s prescriptions apply [or do not apply]” (Shannon 2000: 295).
 
2
As noted in Chapter 1, the UNSC’s acceptance of NATO’s argument served the basis for Russia’s allegations of bias, weakening its interpretive power through its perception of selectivity.
 
3
The lack of a humanitarian intervention in Rwanda is not discussed here because the opposition to an intervention did not couch their arguments in the language of violation of the non-intervention norm. This differs from the case of the Indian intervention mentioned above in which the humanitarian justifications India made were rejected as unsuitable grounds for violating the non-intervention norm. Rather, the opposition in the Rwandan case mainly centered on questioning whether a genocide was occurring and whether an intervention would be successful. Thus, it is likely that any intervention that would have been launched would not have been considered an impermissible violation of the norm of non-intervention (Wheeler 2003:36).
 
4
The focus on structure in this example remains applicable even though Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) emphasized the role of agents in their explanation. This is because the structure of the international system (power distribution) allowed agents (norm entrepreneurs) within Britain to have more influence in the salience of this norm compared to norm entrepreneurs from countries with less global power. In this way, I apply Kim and Sharman (2014)‘s theorization approach which appreciates the role of both agency and structure in understanding how norms emerge.
 
5
This speech was translated into English and heavily covered by Russia Today.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Allison R. Russia, the West, and Military Intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.CrossRef Allison R. Russia, the West, and Military Intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Averre D. From Pristina to Tskhinvali: The Legacy of Operation Allied Force in Russia’s Relations with the West. International Affairs. 2009;85(3):575–91.CrossRef Averre D. From Pristina to Tskhinvali: The Legacy of Operation Allied Force in Russia’s Relations with the West. International Affairs. 2009;85(3):575–91.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ayoob M. Humanitarian Intervention and State Sovereignty. The International Journal of Human Rights. 2002;6(1):81–102.CrossRef Ayoob M. Humanitarian Intervention and State Sovereignty. The International Journal of Human Rights. 2002;6(1):81–102.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Badescu CG. Authorizing Humanitarian Intervention: Hard Choices in Saving Strangers. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 2007;40(1):51–78.CrossRef Badescu CG. Authorizing Humanitarian Intervention: Hard Choices in Saving Strangers. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 2007;40(1):51–78.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bazyler M. Reexamining the Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention in the Light of the Atrocities in Kampuchea and Ethiopia. Stanford Journal of International Law. 1987;23:547–619. Bazyler M. Reexamining the Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention in the Light of the Atrocities in Kampuchea and Ethiopia. Stanford Journal of International Law. 1987;23:547–619.
Zurück zum Zitat Beaulac S. The Power of Language in the Making of International Law: The Word Sovereignty in Bodin and Vattel and the Myth of Westphalia. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; 2004. Beaulac S. The Power of Language in the Making of International Law: The Word Sovereignty in Bodin and Vattel and the Myth of Westphalia. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; 2004.
Zurück zum Zitat Bellamy AJ. Humanitarian Intervention and the Three Traditions. Global Society. 2003;17(1):3–20.CrossRef Bellamy AJ. Humanitarian Intervention and the Three Traditions. Global Society. 2003;17(1):3–20.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bellamy AJ. Responsibility to Protect or Trojan Horse? The Crisis in Darfur and Humanitarian Intervention after Iraq. Ethics & International Affairs. 2005;19(2):31–54.CrossRef Bellamy AJ. Responsibility to Protect or Trojan Horse? The Crisis in Darfur and Humanitarian Intervention after Iraq. Ethics & International Affairs. 2005;19(2):31–54.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Binder M. Humanitarian Crises and the International Politics of Selectivity. Human Rights Review. 2009;10:327–48.CrossRef Binder M. Humanitarian Crises and the International Politics of Selectivity. Human Rights Review. 2009;10:327–48.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Brunnée J, Toope SJ. The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force: Building Legality? Global Responsibility to Protect. 2010;2(3):191–212.CrossRef Brunnée J, Toope SJ. The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force: Building Legality? Global Responsibility to Protect. 2010;2(3):191–212.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bundegaard C. The Normative Divide in International Society: Sovereignty versus Responsibility. Danish Institute for International Studies Working Paper. 2010;2010(27):1–20. Bundegaard C. The Normative Divide in International Society: Sovereignty versus Responsibility. Danish Institute for International Studies Working Paper. 2010;2010(27):1–20.
Zurück zum Zitat Cassese A. Ex Iniuria Ius Oritur: Are we Moving towards International Legitimation of Forcible Countermeasures in the World Community? European Journal of International Law. 1999;10:23–30.CrossRef Cassese A. Ex Iniuria Ius Oritur: Are we Moving towards International Legitimation of Forcible Countermeasures in the World Community? European Journal of International Law. 1999;10:23–30.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Choi S-W. What Determines US Humanitarian Intervention? Conflict Management and Peace Science. 2013;30(2):121–39.CrossRef Choi S-W. What Determines US Humanitarian Intervention? Conflict Management and Peace Science. 2013;30(2):121–39.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Chomsky N. The New Military Humanism: Lessons from Kosovo. London: Pluto Press; 1999. Chomsky N. The New Military Humanism: Lessons from Kosovo. London: Pluto Press; 1999.
Zurück zum Zitat Crawford NC. Just War Theory and the US Counterterror War. Perspective on Politics. 2003;1(1):5–25.CrossRef Crawford NC. Just War Theory and the US Counterterror War. Perspective on Politics. 2003;1(1):5–25.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat D’Aspremont J. Mapping the Concepts behind the Contemporary Liberalization of the Use of Force in International Law. Journal of International Law. 2014;31:1089–149. D’Aspremont J. Mapping the Concepts behind the Contemporary Liberalization of the Use of Force in International Law. Journal of International Law. 2014;31:1089–149.
Zurück zum Zitat Evans G. From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect. Wisconsin International Law Journal. 2006;24:703. Evans G. From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect. Wisconsin International Law Journal. 2006;24:703.
Zurück zum Zitat Finnemore M. Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention. In: Katzenstein PJ, editor. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press; 1996. Finnemore M. Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention. In: Katzenstein PJ, editor. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press; 1996.
Zurück zum Zitat Finnemore M. The Purpose of Intervention. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; 2003. Finnemore M. The Purpose of Intervention. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; 2003.
Zurück zum Zitat Finnemore M, Sikkink K. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization. 1998;52(4):887–917.CrossRef Finnemore M, Sikkink K. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization. 1998;52(4):887–917.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fixdal M, Smith D. Humanitarian Intervention and Just War. Merson International Studies Review. 1998;42(2):283–312.CrossRef Fixdal M, Smith D. Humanitarian Intervention and Just War. Merson International Studies Review. 1998;42(2):283–312.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fonteyne J-P. Forcible Self-Help by States to Protect Human Rights: Recent Views from the United Nations. In: Lillich RB, editor. Humanitarian Intervention and the United Nations. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia; 1973. Fonteyne J-P. Forcible Self-Help by States to Protect Human Rights: Recent Views from the United Nations. In: Lillich RB, editor. Humanitarian Intervention and the United Nations. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia; 1973.
Zurück zum Zitat Fordham BO. Power or Plenty? Economic Interests, Security Concerns, and American Intervention. International Studies Quarterly. 2008;52:737–58.CrossRef Fordham BO. Power or Plenty? Economic Interests, Security Concerns, and American Intervention. International Studies Quarterly. 2008;52:737–58.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Franck TM. The Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Power Disequilibrium. American Journal of International Law. 2002;100(1):88–106.CrossRef Franck TM. The Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Power Disequilibrium. American Journal of International Law. 2002;100(1):88–106.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Franck TM. Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Power Disequilibrium. TheAmerican Journal of International Law. 2006;100:88.CrossRef Franck TM. Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Power Disequilibrium. TheAmerican Journal of International Law. 2006;100:88.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Glanville L. Intervention in Syria: From Sovereign Consent to Regional Consent. International Studies Perspective. 2013a;14:325–42.CrossRef Glanville L. Intervention in Syria: From Sovereign Consent to Regional Consent. International Studies Perspective. 2013a;14:325–42.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Glanville L. The Myth of “Traditional” Sovereignty. International Studies Quarterly. 2013b;57:79–90.CrossRef Glanville L. The Myth of “Traditional” Sovereignty. International Studies Quarterly. 2013b;57:79–90.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Glassman A. The Evolution of the Prohibition on the Use of Force and its Conflict with Human Rights Protection: Balancing Equally Forceful Jus Cogens Norms. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs. 2011;16:345–80. Glassman A. The Evolution of the Prohibition on the Use of Force and its Conflict with Human Rights Protection: Balancing Equally Forceful Jus Cogens Norms. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs. 2011;16:345–80.
Zurück zum Zitat Goodman R. Humanitarian Intervention and the Pretexts for War. American Journal of International Law. 2006;100(1):107–41.CrossRef Goodman R. Humanitarian Intervention and the Pretexts for War. American Journal of International Law. 2006;100(1):107–41.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Havercroft J. Was Westphalia “all that”? Hobbes, Bellarmine, and the Norm of Non-Intervention. Global Constitutionalism. 2012;1(1):120–40.CrossRef Havercroft J. Was Westphalia “all that”? Hobbes, Bellarmine, and the Norm of Non-Intervention. Global Constitutionalism. 2012;1(1):120–40.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hurd I. Is Humanitarian Intervention Legal? The Rule of Law in an Incoherent World. Ethics and International Affairs. 2011;25(3):293–313.CrossRef Hurd I. Is Humanitarian Intervention Legal? The Rule of Law in an Incoherent World. Ethics and International Affairs. 2011;25(3):293–313.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Johnstone I. Security Council Deliberations: The Power of the Better Argument. European Journal of International Law. 2003;14(3):437–80.CrossRef Johnstone I. Security Council Deliberations: The Power of the Better Argument. European Journal of International Law. 2003;14(3):437–80.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kahler M. Legitimacy, Humanitarian Intervention, and International Institutions. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics. 2011;10(1):20–45.CrossRef Kahler M. Legitimacy, Humanitarian Intervention, and International Institutions. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics. 2011;10(1):20–45.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Karagiannis E. The Russian Interventions in South Ossetia and Crimea Compared: Military Performance, Legitimacy, and Goals. Contemporary Security Policy. 2014;35:1–21.CrossRef Karagiannis E. The Russian Interventions in South Ossetia and Crimea Compared: Military Performance, Legitimacy, and Goals. Contemporary Security Policy. 2014;35:1–21.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kardaş Ş. Humanitarian Intervention: The Evolution of the Idea and Practice. Journal of International Affairs. 2001;6:2. Kardaş Ş. Humanitarian Intervention: The Evolution of the Idea and Practice. Journal of International Affairs. 2001;6:2.
Zurück zum Zitat Keene E. International Hierarchy and the Origins of the Modern Practice of Intervention. Review of International Studies. 2013;39(5):1077–90.CrossRef Keene E. International Hierarchy and the Origins of the Modern Practice of Intervention. Review of International Studies. 2013;39(5):1077–90.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kegley CW Jr, Raymond GA, Hermann MG. The Rise and Fall of the Nonintervention Norm: Some Correlates and Potential Consequences. The Fletcher Forum of Foreign Affairs. 1998;22(1):81–97. Kegley CW Jr, Raymond GA, Hermann MG. The Rise and Fall of the Nonintervention Norm: Some Correlates and Potential Consequences. The Fletcher Forum of Foreign Affairs. 1998;22(1):81–97.
Zurück zum Zitat Kelley J. Who Keeps International Commitments and Why? The International Criminal Court and Bilateral Nonsurrender Agreements. American Political Science Review. 2007;101(3):573–89.CrossRef Kelley J. Who Keeps International Commitments and Why? The International Criminal Court and Bilateral Nonsurrender Agreements. American Political Science Review. 2007;101(3):573–89.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Knudsen TB. The History of Humanitarian Intervention—the Rule or the Exception. Annual Meeting of the ISA’s 50th Annual Convention. New York City. 2009. Knudsen TB. The History of Humanitarian Intervention—the Rule or the Exception. Annual Meeting of the ISA’s 50th Annual Convention. New York City. 2009.
Zurück zum Zitat Kreß C. Major Post-Westphalian Shifts and Some Important Neo-Westphalian Hesitations in the State Practice on the International Law on the Use of Force. Journal of the Use of Force and International Law. 2014;1(1):11–54. Kreß C. Major Post-Westphalian Shifts and Some Important Neo-Westphalian Hesitations in the State Practice on the International Law on the Use of Force. Journal of the Use of Force and International Law. 2014;1(1):11–54.
Zurück zum Zitat Krisch N. Legality, Morality, and the Dilemma of Humanitarian Intervention after Kosovo. European Journal of International Law. 2002;13(1):323–35.CrossRef Krisch N. Legality, Morality, and the Dilemma of Humanitarian Intervention after Kosovo. European Journal of International Law. 2002;13(1):323–35.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Krasner S. Compromising Westphalia. International Security. 1995/1996;20(3):115–51.CrossRef Krasner S. Compromising Westphalia. International Security. 1995/1996;20(3):115–51.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HJ, and Sharman JC. Accounts and accountability: Corruption, human rights, and individual accountability norms. International Organization 2014;68(2):417–48. Kim HJ, and Sharman JC. Accounts and accountability: Corruption, human rights, and individual accountability norms. International Organization 2014;68(2):417–48.
Zurück zum Zitat Kurowska X. Multipolarity as Resistance to Liberal Norms: Russia’s Position on Responsibility to Protect. Conflict, Security, and Development. 2014;14(4):489–508.CrossRef Kurowska X. Multipolarity as Resistance to Liberal Norms: Russia’s Position on Responsibility to Protect. Conflict, Security, and Development. 2014;14(4):489–508.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Leclerc-Gagné E, Byers M. A Question of Intent: The Crime of Aggression and Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law. 2009;41:379–90. Leclerc-Gagné E, Byers M. A Question of Intent: The Crime of Aggression and Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law. 2009;41:379–90.
Zurück zum Zitat MacFarlane N, Weiss T. Political Interest and Humanitarian Action. Security Studies. 2000;10(1):112–42.CrossRef MacFarlane N, Weiss T. Political Interest and Humanitarian Action. Security Studies. 2000;10(1):112–42.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Menkiszak M. The Putin Doctrine: The Formation of a Conceptual Framework for Russian Dominance. OSW Center for Eastern Studies: Commentary. 2014;131:1–7. Menkiszak M. The Putin Doctrine: The Formation of a Conceptual Framework for Russian Dominance. OSW Center for Eastern Studies: Commentary. 2014;131:1–7.
Zurück zum Zitat Mohamed S. Restructuring the Debate on Unauthorized Humanitarian Intervention. North Caroline Law Review. 2009;88:1275–332. Mohamed S. Restructuring the Debate on Unauthorized Humanitarian Intervention. North Caroline Law Review. 2009;88:1275–332.
Zurück zum Zitat Mohamed S. Taking Stock of the Responsibility to Protect. Stanford Journal of International Law. 2012;48:319–39. Mohamed S. Taking Stock of the Responsibility to Protect. Stanford Journal of International Law. 2012;48:319–39.
Zurück zum Zitat Morris J. Libya and Syria: R2P and the Spectre of the Swinging Pendulum. International Affairs. 2013;89(5):1265–83.CrossRef Morris J. Libya and Syria: R2P and the Spectre of the Swinging Pendulum. International Affairs. 2013;89(5):1265–83.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Murphy SD. Humanitarian Intervention: The United Nations in an Evolving World. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1996. Murphy SD. Humanitarian Intervention: The United Nations in an Evolving World. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1996.
Zurück zum Zitat Osiander A. Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. International Organization. 2001;55(2):251–87.CrossRef Osiander A. Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. International Organization. 2001;55(2):251–87.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Panke D, Petersohn U. Why International Norms Disappear Sometimes. European Journal of International Relations. 2012;18(4):719–42.CrossRef Panke D, Petersohn U. Why International Norms Disappear Sometimes. European Journal of International Relations. 2012;18(4):719–42.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Paust JJ. Relative Sovereignty and Permissible Use of Armed Force. Michigan State University International Law Review. 2011;20:1–10. Paust JJ. Relative Sovereignty and Permissible Use of Armed Force. Michigan State University International Law Review. 2011;20:1–10.
Zurück zum Zitat Petty KA. Criminalizing Force: Resolving the Threshold Question for the Crime of Aggression in the Context of Modern Conflict. Seattle University Law Review. 2009;33:105–50. Petty KA. Criminalizing Force: Resolving the Threshold Question for the Crime of Aggression in the Context of Modern Conflict. Seattle University Law Review. 2009;33:105–50.
Zurück zum Zitat Philpott D. Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2001. Philpott D. Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2001.
Zurück zum Zitat Pitts J. Intervention and Sovereign Equality: Legacies of Vatel. In: Recchia S, Welsh JM, editors. Just and Unjust Military Intervention: European Thinkers from Vitoria to Mill. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013. Pitts J. Intervention and Sovereign Equality: Legacies of Vatel. In: Recchia S, Welsh JM, editors. Just and Unjust Military Intervention: European Thinkers from Vitoria to Mill. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013.
Zurück zum Zitat Reus-Smit C. The Concept of Intervention. Review of International Studies. 2013;39(5):1057–76.CrossRef Reus-Smit C. The Concept of Intervention. Review of International Studies. 2013;39(5):1057–76.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Sayapin S. The Crime of Aggression in International Criminal Law. The Hague: TMC Asser Institute; 2014.CrossRef Sayapin S. The Crime of Aggression in International Criminal Law. The Hague: TMC Asser Institute; 2014.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Scheffer DJ. Toward a Modern Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention. University of Toledo Law Review. 1992;23:253. Scheffer DJ. Toward a Modern Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention. University of Toledo Law Review. 1992;23:253.
Zurück zum Zitat Shannon VP. Norms are What States Make of Them: The Political Psychology of Norm Violation. International Studies Quarterly. 2000;44(2):293–316.CrossRef Shannon VP. Norms are What States Make of Them: The Political Psychology of Norm Violation. International Studies Quarterly. 2000;44(2):293–316.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Snetkov A, Lanteigne M. ‘The Loud Dissenter and its Cautious Partner’–Russia, China, Global Governance and Humanitarian Intervention. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific. 2014;15(1):113–46.CrossRef Snetkov A, Lanteigne M. ‘The Loud Dissenter and its Cautious Partner’–Russia, China, Global Governance and Humanitarian Intervention. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific. 2014;15(1):113–46.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Thakur R. R2P after Libya and Syria: Engaging Emerging Powers. The Washington Quarterly. 2013;36(2):61–76.CrossRef Thakur R. R2P after Libya and Syria: Engaging Emerging Powers. The Washington Quarterly. 2013;36(2):61–76.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Trim DJB, Simms B. Toward a History of Humanitarian Intervention. In: Simms B, Simms DJB, editors. Humanitarian Intervention: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef Trim DJB, Simms B. Toward a History of Humanitarian Intervention. In: Simms B, Simms DJB, editors. Humanitarian Intervention: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tsygankov AP, Tarver-Wahlquist M. Duelling Honors: Power, Identity, and the Russia-Georgia Divide. Foreign Policy Analysis. 2015;5:307–26.CrossRef Tsygankov AP, Tarver-Wahlquist M. Duelling Honors: Power, Identity, and the Russia-Georgia Divide. Foreign Policy Analysis. 2015;5:307–26.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Valek P. Is Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention Compatible with the U.N. Charter? Michigan Journal of International Law. 2005;26:1223. Valek P. Is Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention Compatible with the U.N. Charter? Michigan Journal of International Law. 2005;26:1223.
Zurück zum Zitat Vincent RJ. Non-Intervention and International Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1974. Vincent RJ. Non-Intervention and International Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1974.
Zurück zum Zitat Walzer M. Just and Unjust Wars A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books; 2006. Walzer M. Just and Unjust Wars A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books; 2006.
Zurück zum Zitat Weiss T. Halting Genocide: Rhetoric versus Reality. Genocide Studies and Prevention: an International Journal. 2007;2(1):7–30.CrossRef Weiss T. Halting Genocide: Rhetoric versus Reality. Genocide Studies and Prevention: an International Journal. 2007;2(1):7–30.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Wheeler LK. The Grenada Invasion: Expanding the Scope of Humanitarian Intervention. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review. 1985;8(2):413–30. Wheeler LK. The Grenada Invasion: Expanding the Scope of Humanitarian Intervention. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review. 1985;8(2):413–30.
Zurück zum Zitat Wheeler N. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003. Wheeler N. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003.
Zurück zum Zitat Wiener A. Contested Compliance: Interventions on the Normative Structure of World Politics. European Journal of International Relations. 2004;10(2):189–234.CrossRef Wiener A. Contested Compliance: Interventions on the Normative Structure of World Politics. European Journal of International Relations. 2004;10(2):189–234.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Zacher MW. The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force. International Organization. 2001;55(2):215–50.CrossRef Zacher MW. The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force. International Organization. 2001;55(2):215–50.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Zajadlo J. Legality and Legitimization Humanitarian Intervention. American Behavioral Scientist. 2005;48(6):653–70.CrossRef Zajadlo J. Legality and Legitimization Humanitarian Intervention. American Behavioral Scientist. 2005;48(6):653–70.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ziegler CE. Contesting the Responsibility to Protect. International Studies Perspectives. 2014;17:1–23. Ziegler CE. Contesting the Responsibility to Protect. International Studies Perspectives. 2014;17:1–23.
Zurück zum Zitat Zifcak S. The Responsibility to Protect after Libya and Syria. Melbourne Journal of International Law. 2012;13:59–61. Zifcak S. The Responsibility to Protect after Libya and Syria. Melbourne Journal of International Law. 2012;13:59–61.
Metadaten
Titel
Contestation in the Non-intervention Norm
verfasst von
Betcy Jose
Copyright-Jahr
2018
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69323-1_4