Towards Global Justice Sovereignty In An Interdependent World

With Forewords by Geoffrey Robertson QC, Doughty Street Chambers, London, UK and Professor Mihail E. Ionescu, Bucharest, Romania Simona Ţuţuianu describes a new model of sovereignty which is fast replacing the traditional Westphalian model embodied in Article 2 of the UN Charter and rigorously followed throughout the Cold War. The scholarly basis for this new model draws upon developments in international criminal law which first emerged from the Nuremberg trials and upon more recent interstate economic cooperation which has turned sovereign independence into interdependence across a range of state functions. Does this mean that traditional Westphalian concepts of sovereignty should be abandoned in constructing a new theory of world governance for the twenty-first century? Not at all. A new model, which can be called the pattern of interdependence-based sovereignty, serves to explain contemporary events that puzzle traditional theorists, such as the war over Kosovo, the invasions of Iraq and Libya, the emergence of a “Responsibility to protect” doctrine and its recent validation in Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973. We are witnessing the emergence of a new philosophy of action, which is in the process of producing a 21st century system of international relations. The Book will appeal to academics, students and postgraduates studying international affairs, politics, international law, diplomatic history, or war and/or peace studies. It is particularly of interest for NATO establishments and national military schools, while experts and scholars will value its theory of what sovereignty means today. The Book offers a multidisciplinary approach which underpins a new theory of how human rights can be better protected in a better world. There is a unique case study of cooperative security in the Greater Black Sea Area, by one of the few experts on the politics of this region. It will be read and appreciated by those who need to understand how modern international law and diplomacy really work. Journalists, media commentators, human rights NGOs, aid agencies, diplomats and government officials need the information in this Book.

Which political principles should govern global politics? Simon Caney engages with the work of philosophers, political theorists, and international relations scholars to examine some of the most pressing global issues of our time. Are there universal civil, political, and economic human rights? Can humanitarian intervention be justified?

Now in paperback—with a new preface by the author Americans have long been protective of the country's sovereignty—all the way back to George Washington who, when retiring as president, admonished his successors to avoid “permanent” alliances with foreign powers. Ever since, the nation has faced periodic, often heated, debates about how to maintain that sovereignty, and whether and when it is appropriate to cede some of it in the form of treaties and the alliances about which Washington warned. As the 2016 election made clear, sovereignty is also one of the most frequently invoked, polemical, and misunderstood concepts in politics—particularly American politics. The concept wields symbolic power, implying something sacred and inalienable: the right of the people to control their fate without subordination to outside authorities. Given its emotional pull, however, the concept is easily high-jacked by political opportunists. By playing the sovereignty card, they can curtail more reasoned debates over the merits of proposed international commitments by portraying supporters of global treaties or organizations as enemies of motherhood and apple pie. Such polemics distract Americans from what is really at stake in the sovereignty debate: the ability of the United States to shape its destiny in a global age. The United States cannot successfully manage globalization, much less insulate itself from cross-border threats, on its own. As global integration deepens and cross-border challenges grow, the nation's fate is increasingly tied to that of other countries, whose cooperation will be needed to exploit the shared opportunities and mitigate the common risks of interdependence. The Sovereignty Wars is intended to help today's policymakers think more clearly about what is actually at stake in the sovereignty debate and to provide some criteria for determining when it is appropriate to make bargains over sovereignty—and how to make them.

Protecting sovereignty while advancing American interests in the global age Americans have long been protective of the country’s sovereignty—beginning when George Washington retired as president with the admonition for his successors to avoid “permanent” alliances with foreign powers. Ever since, the nation has faced persistent, often heated debates about how to maintain that sovereignty, and whether it is endangered when the United States enters international organizations, treaties, and alliances about which Washington warned. As the recent election made clear, sovereignty is also one of the most frequently invoked, polemical, and misunderstood concepts in politics—particularly American politics. The concept wields symbolic power, implying something sacred and inalienable: the right of the people to control their fate without subordination to outside authorities. Given its emotional pull, however, the concept is easily highjacked by political opportunists. By playing the sovereignty card, they can curtail more reasoned debates over the merits of proposed international commitments by portraying supporters of global treaties or organizations as enemies of motherhood and apple pie. Such polemics distract Americans from what is really at stake in the sovereignty debate: namely, the ability of the United States to shape its destiny in a global age. The United States cannot successfully manage globalization, much less insulate itself from cross-border threats, on its own. As global integration deepens and cross-border challenges grow, the nation’s fate is increasingly tied to that of other countries, whose cooperation will be needed to exploit the shared opportunities and mitigate the common risks of interdependence. The Sovereignty Wars is intended to help today's policymakers think more clearly about what is actually at stake in the sovereignty debate and to provide some criteria for determining when it is appropriate to make bargains over sovereignty—and how to make them.

This book examines the development of Timor-Leste’s foreign policy since achieving political independence in 2002. It considers the influence of Timor-Leste’s historical experiences with foreign intervention on how the small, new state has pursued security. The book argues that efforts to secure the Timorese state have been motivated by a desire to reduce foreign intervention and dependence upon other actors within the international community. Timor-Leste’s desire for ‘real’ independence — characterized by the absence of foreign interference — permeates all spheres of its international political, cultural and economic relations and foreign policy discourse. Securing the state entails projecting a legitimate identity in the international community to protect and guarantee political recognition of sovereign status, an imperative that gives rise to Timor-Leste’s aspirational foreign policy. The book examines Timor-Leste’s key bilateral and multilateral diplomatic relations, its engagement with the global normative order, and its place within the changing Asia-Pacific region.

This volume examines the dialogue around global public goods and development cooperation. It asks: how will international cooperation and development institutions be changed? How can we make sure that these global initiatives and institutions are innovating for the better?

The International Forum for Social Development was a 3 year project undertaken by the United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs between 2001 and 2004 to promote international cooperation for social development and supporting developing countries and social groups not benefiting from the globalization process. This publication provides an overview and interpretation of the discussions and debates that occurred at the four meetings of the Forum for Social Development held at the United Nations headquarters in New York, within the framework of the implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development.

This book critically interrogates the neoliberal peacebuilding and statebuilding model and proposes a popular progressive model centred around the lived realities of African societies. The neoliberal interventionist model assumed prominence and universal hegemony following the demise of state socialism at the end of the Cold War. However, this book argues that it is a primarily short-term, top-down approach that imposes Western norms and values on conflict and post-conflict societies. By contrast, the popular progressive model espoused by this book is based on stringent examination and analysis of the reality of the socio-economic development, structures, institutions, politics and cultures of developing societies. In doing so, it combines bottom-up and top-down, popular and elite, and long-term evolutionary processes of societal construction as a requisite for enduring peacebuilding and statebuilding. By comparing and contrasting the dominant neoliberal peacebuilding and statebuilding model with a popular progressive model, the book seeks to empower locals (both elites and masses) to sit in the driver’s seat and construct their own societies. As such, it is an important contribution to scholars, activists, policymakers, civil society organisations, NGOs and all those who are concerned with peace, stability and development across Africa and other developing countries.