Between States

Winner of the 2010 George Louis Beer Prize of the American Historical Association. The struggle between Hungary and Romania for control of Transylvania seems at first sight a side-show in the story of the Nazi New Order and the Second World War. These allies of the Third Reich spent much of the war arguing bitterly over Transylvania's future, and Germany and Italy were drawn into their dispute to prevent it from spiraling into a regional war. But precisely as a result of this interaction, the story of the Transylvanian Question offers a new way into the history of how state leaders and national elites have interpreted what "Europe" means. Tucked into the folds of the Transylvanian Question's bizarre genealogy is a secret that no one ever tried to keep, but that has remained a secret nonetheless: small states matter. The perspective of small states puts the struggle for mastery among its Great Powers into a new perspective.

Discusses how an analogy between States and international organizations has influenced the development of international law.

Annie's home and heart are divided by the Civil War. Annie Sinclair's Virginia home is in the battle path of the Civil War. Her brothers, Laurence and Jamie, fight to defend the South, while Annie and her mother tend to wounded soldiers. When she develops a romantic connection with a Union Army lieutenant, Annie's view of the war broadens. Then an accusation calls her loyalty into question. A nation and a heart divided force Annie to choose her own course.

In the five hundred years covered by this volume there was scarcely a year which passed without either war or some open demonstration of hostility between the many sovereign powers which governed Europe. States and peoples lived under the shadow of war, were ceaselessly prompted to consider the possibility of war, had to find ways of dealing with the consequences of war. This volume in the Origins of the Modern State in Europe series focuses on the crucial role of war in the formation of state systems. It starts from the assumption that interstate rivalries and conflicts were at the heart not only of the demarcation of territories, but also of the ever-growing need to mobilize resources for warfare. Institutionalization was consequently highly dependent on such competition. It was for military reasons, and with military aims, that the state secured control of time and space, both at sea and on land. The Origins of the Modern State in Europe series arises from an important international research programme sponsored by the European Science Foundation. The aim of the series, which comprises seven volumes, is to bring together specialists from different countries, who reinterpret from a comparative European perspective different aspects of the formation of the state over the long period from the beginning of the thirteenth to the end of the eighteenth century. One of the main achievements of the research programme has been to overcome the long-established historiographical tendency to regard states mainly from the viewpoint of their twentieth-century borders.

In the field of investment treaty arbitration, the co-existence of contracts and treaties has generated an increasingly divided jurisprudence on central aspects of treaty interpretation. This book comprehensively examines the legal problems surrounding the relationship of these two instruments.

The issue of competence division is of fundamental importance as it reflects the 'power bargain' struck between the Member States and their Union, determining the limits of the authority of the EU as well as the limits of the authority of the Member States. It defines the nature of the EU as a polity, as well as the identity of the Member States. After over six years since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, it is high time to take stock of whether the reforms that were adopted to make the Union's system of division of competences between the EU Member States clearer, more coherent, and better at containing European integration, have been successful. This book asks whether 'the competence problem' has finally been solved. Given the fundamental importance of this question, this publication will be of interest to a wide audience, from constitutional and substantive EU law scholars to practitioners in the EU institutions and EU legal practice more generally.