Ebook Free World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law
By this problem, you may not need to be stressed. This book will certainly aid you in getting the best source of your problem and also desire. Even this publication is a brand-new coming publication, it will not males that the rate of interest is much less. You can as compare to the various other book with very same subjects. It's really affordable. So, just what's taking place? Let obtain and also read World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law as soon as possible.
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law
Ebook Free World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law
Discussing pastime, one of the leisure activities that make a person successful reads. Additionally, checking out a high qualified book. One that you could pick as the resource is World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law This is not kind of conventional book that has great name. It is specific publication that we really advise you to review. By having hobby to check out publications, you could constantly enhance your mind in all the time. As well as exactly what you can take currently to help you locate the liable analysis product is this publication.
Well, book World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law will make you closer to exactly what you are eager. This World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law will be always buddy at any time. You could not forcedly to always complete over reviewing a book in short time. It will certainly be only when you have extra time and spending couple of time to make you feel pleasure with just what you check out. So, you could get the significance of the message from each sentence in the e-book.
If you can see exactly how guide is recommended, you might should recognize that creates this book and also publish it. It will actually influence the just how people will be appreciated to read this publication. As below, World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law can be obtained by searching for in some shops. Or, if you want to get simple and also quick means, simply get it in this website. Right here, we not just provide you the convenience of reading product, yet likewise fast method to obtain it. When you require some days to wait to get guide, you will certainly get the quick respond right here.
So, when you require quick that book World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law, it does not need to await some days to get the book World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law You could straight obtain the book to conserve in your gadget. Even you love reading this World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law anywhere you have time, you can appreciate it to review World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law It is surely valuable for you who intend to get the much more valuable time for reading. Why don't you spend 5 mins and also invest little money to get guide World Peace Through Law: Replacing War With The Global Rule Of Law right here? Never ever let the new point goes away from you.
Review
‘There are four reasons why you should read this book. First, the international system is inevitably being transformed by technology and global integration; this book presents a coherent vision of a successor system that would be superior to others currently on offer. Second, the system it describes is an answer to the perennial objection to eliminating nuclear weapons, which is that there is no better way to prevent war: yes, there is, it says. Third, this book is an encyclopaedic history of things you never knew before about world peace through law and the ‘practical men’ like Teddy Roosevelt, who supported the idea. And fourth, if you think ponderous prose goes with the territory on this subject, think again: this book is engaging, lively, and fun.’ -- James Goodby, Chief U.S. Negotiator for the Safe and Secure Dismantlement of Nuclear Weapons (1993). ‘There is no problem more important than halting the illegal use of armed force to settle international disputes. James Taylor Ranney's book offers the readers a comprehensive historical analysis with possible solutions to contemporaneous conflicts. It is an invaluable goldmine for all students concerned with current problems of world peace.’ -- Benjamin B. Ferencz, Former Nuremberg War Crimes Prosecutor and Peace Advocate ‘A powerful argument that the abolition of nuclear weapons requires a stronger regime for the peaceful resolution of international disputes. Ranney marshals compelling evidence that the world is moving in that direction in any case because of the need for peaceful solutions of the multiplying issues that are arising in global markets and the global commons. The danger from nuclear weapons is so acute, however, that this evolutionary process is insufficient. A more urgent, focused effort is required.’ -- Frank N. von Hippel, Princeton University, USA ‘Just when the vision of a world at peace seems to have faded into obscurity, James Taylor Ranney comes along with an updated version of his classic study 'Peace through Law'. It could also be titled 'Peace is Possible' and will encourage visionaries and convert sceptics.’ – Peter Weiss, President Emeritus, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, USA ‘This book is refreshing and a badly needed antidote at a time when hawks with sinister faces tell us that peace and arms control can be threatened by a convention that commits states to non-use and non-possession of nuclear weapons. When the world is spending nearly two trillion dollars a year on means and measures to blow us up, Professor Ranney has the temerity to argue for the ending of wars. He does not grope for a world federation or general and complete disarmament, but rather for reliance on law and moderate and time honoured means such as mediation, arbitration and UN forces.’ -- Hans Blix, Third Director-General Emeritus of the International Atomic Energy Agency ‘In this lively, creative challenge to war - and especially nuclear war - James T. Ranney provides us with a path toward an international system governed by law rather than by violence. Championing arms reductions and dispute resolution, backed by effective enforcement, Ranney outlines a practical way to move toward a more peaceful world.’ -- Lawrence S. Wittner, author of 'Confronting the Bomb' ‘James Taylor Ranney's book straddles a number of subject areas in a creative and very readable fashion. It should be of interest to those interested in international relations, security studies, disarmament, peace studies, dispute resolution and, of course, international law and international organizations.’ -- Roger S. Clark, Rutgers University, USA 'On the basis of lifelong learning and deep ethical commitments, James Taylor Ranney has produced a comprehensive guide to how peace might be secured in our troubled times by a prudent reliance on the mechanisms, institutions, and values of law. Every engaged citizen has an obligation to read this book and ponder its central prescriptions for achieving a peaceful world.' -- Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University, USA ‘This new work merging history, political science, and jurisprudence is superbly clear, accessible and cogent not only for scholars and academics, but also for leaders and decision-makers in governmental and non-governmental organizations, and for all looking to become better informed on how to achieve and maintain peace through the global rule of law.’ -- Kevin Govern, Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law, USA ‘In World Peace Through Law James Taylor Ranney thoughtfully proposes concrete measures that could lead countries to abolish nuclear weapons, establish compulsory international dispute settlement mechanisms, and create effective enforcement mechanisms, including an international police force. Carefully researched, the book analyzes the intellectual roots of the world peace through law concept and explores the efforts of activists and politicians – including many U.S. Presidents, both Democratic and Republican – to realize its core features. The world greatly needs Ranney’s mix of idealism and pragmatism concerning how international law can further the essential goals of peace and security.’ -- John E. Noyes, Professor Emeritus, California Western School of Law, USA ‘In this stimulating, thought-provoking, thoroughly researched, and historically grounded volume, James Taylor Ranney brings together his reflections on world peace through the rule of law carefully and systematically developed over the course of several decades. His argument and seriousness of purpose are enhanced throughout by his candid discussions of the counter- positions of those who disagree with him and his honest acknowledgment that there are ‘many different paths to peace’. Ranney describes himself as a ‘pragmatic idealist’ who is realistic about the weaknesses of existing international law but at the same time optimistic about its future possibilities. Toward this end, he is owed a debt of gratitude for his vision of how the world might move toward future peace.’ -- Paul Gordon Lauren, University of Montana, USA ‘James Taylor Ranney’s book is an important contribution to raising awareness, deepening understanding, and inspiring a new generation of peace activists to campaign for lawful alternatives to organized armed violence around the globe.’ -- Mary Ellen O’Connell, University of Notre Dame, USA
Read more
About the Author
James Taylor Ranney is a retired Adjunct Professor, Widener Law School, USA. He was a co-founder of the Jeannette Rankin Peace Center, a Legal Consultant to the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Chair of the Philadelphia Chapter of Citizens for Global Solutions, and is currently a Board Member of the Project for Nuclear Awareness.
Read more
Product details
Paperback: 140 pages
Publisher: Routledge; 1 edition (May 17, 2019)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0367232995
ISBN-13: 978-0367232993
Product Dimensions:
5.4 x 8.5 inches
Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review:
4.0 out of 5 stars
1 customer review
Amazon Best Sellers Rank:
#1,459,854 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
As the U.S. government simultaneously threatens the International Criminal Court for even acting as if it might prosecute the United States for crimes in Afghanistan (a topic “investigated†for years now, while the ICC has yet to actually prosecute any non-African for anything) and (with little apparent cognitive dissonance) uses the implausible claim that the Syrian government might violate a law as an excuse to threaten to violate the supreme international law (that against war) by escalating the killing in Syria, the choice between war and law could not be more stark or critical.This question will be taken up by many talented speakers and workshop facilitators at #NoWar2018 later this month in Toronto. The conference will focus on replacing mass killing with nonviolent prevention and resolution of disputes. Participants can be expected to agree on that much and little else.Has law been used more for war or peace thus far? Has it done more harm or good? Should it be a significant focus of a peace movement? Should it focus on local laws, laws on the national level, on tweaking existing international institutions, on democratizing such institutions, on creating a new global federation or government, or on advancing particular disarmament and human rights treaties? No universal consensus, or anything even close to it, exists on any of these points.But consensus can and will be found, I believe, on particular projects (whether or not there is agreement as to their prioritization) and might be found — and would be very beneficial if found — on broader principles if thoroughly and openly discussed and considered.I’ve just read James’ Ranney’s book, World Peace Through Law. I find myself in as much disagreement as agreement with the details of it, but in far more agreement with it than with the status quo of Western common sense. I think it’s important that we think through some of the details, and press forward together as we’re able, whether or not we agree on everything.Ranney proposes a “moderate†vision that stays far short of the utopia of world federalism. Citing the recommendations, now centuries old, of Jeremy Bentham, Ranney writes that “the prospects of adoption of Bentham’s ‘world peace through law’ proposal are almost literally infinitely greater than world federalism being adopted any time soon.â€But wasn’t arbitration, as proposed by Bentham, put into law over 100 years ago? Well, sort of. Here’s how Ranney addresses that in a list of past laws: “Second Hague Convention (outlaws war to collect debt; accepts ‘principle’ of compulsory arbitration, but without operative machinery).†In fact, the primary problem with the Second Hague Convention is not a lack of “machinery†but a lack of actually requiring anything. If one were to go through the text of this law and delete “use their best efforts to†and “as far as circumstances allow†and similar phrases, you’d have a law requiring that nations settle disputes nonviolently — a law that includes a fairly elaborate description of a resolution process.Ranney similarly, but with less basis, dismisses a law that was put in place 21 years later: “Kellogg-Briand Pact (normative principle outlawing war, but no enforcement mechanism).†However, the Kellogg-Briand Pact doesn’t include any of the hedge words found in the Second Hague Convention, or anything whatsoever about normative principles. It requires nonviolent dispute resolution, full stop. In fact the “normative principle outlawing war†— on an actual reading of the text of this law — is exactly the outlawing of war and nothing else. Nothing accurate is communicated by tacking on the words “normative principle.†The need for “machinery,†if not “enforcement†(a troubled term, as we’ll see in a minute) is a real need. But institutions of dispute resolution can be added to the ban on war that exists in the Kellogg-Briand Pact without imagining that the ban does not exist (whether or not one accepts the loopholes purportedly opened up by the UN Charter).Here are the three steps Ranney proposes to replace war with law:“(1) arms reductions—primarily the abolition of nuclear weapons, with necessarily concomitant reductions in conventional forces;â€Agreed!“(2) a four-stage system of global alternative dispute resolution (ADR), utilizing both law and equity;†(“compulsory negotiation, compulsory mediation, compulsory arbitration, and compulsory adjudication by the World Courtâ€)Agreed!“(3) adequate enforcement mechanisms, including a UN Peace Force.†(“not pacifismâ€)Here lies a major disagreement. A UN Peace Force, albeit not appropriately commanded by General George Orwell, exists and has been failing spectacularly since the launch of the war on Korea. Ranney quotes, apparently favorably, another author proposing that this global cop be armed with nuclear weapons. So, that insane idea is new. Ranney also favors the so-called “responsibility to protect†(R2P) the world from genocide through war (without, as is typical, ever clarifying what distinguishes one from the other). And despite the traditional lack of respect for a clear law like the Kellogg-Briand Pact, Ranney offers the traditional respect for R2P despite it not being any law at all: “great caution must be exercised to define very carefully when the new ‘responsibility to protect’ norm mandates intervention.†It mandates nothing whatsoever.Where does this belief in UN war-making for the cause of peace take us? Places like this (the belief in proper illegal occupations): “Despite the opposition of a recent American president, the use of UN troops to assist nation-building is something that obviously should have happened much earlier in Iraq and Afghanistan, now costing the U.S. trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and gaining us nothing but the contempt of a large segment of the world.†The identification of “us†with the U.S. government is the deepest problem here. The notion that these genocidal wars imposed costs on the United States worth even mentioning in comparison with the costs to the wars’ principle victims is the ugliest problem here — uglier still in the context of a paper proposing to use more wars to “prevent genocide.â€In fairness, Ranney favors a democratized United Nations, which would suggest that its use of its armies would look very different from how it does today. But how one squares that with occupying Iraq and Afghanistan I cannot say.Ranney’s support for a global improved-UN war machine runs into another problem raised in his book, I think. He believes World Federalism is so unpopular and implausible as not to be worth promoting any time soon. Yet I believe that handing over a monopoly on warmaking to a democratized United Nations is even more unpopular and implausible. And I agree with the popular sentiment this time. A comprehensive world government able to attempt to restrain the destruction of the environment by homo sapiens is badly needed, while strongly resisted. A war-fighting world institution out from under the thumb of the United States is even more strongly resisted, and a terrible idea.I think the logic of why it’s a terrible idea is fairly clear. If the use of deadly violence is needed to accomplish some good in the world that cannot be accomplished nonviolently (a very dubious claim, but a very widely and deeply believed one) then people will want some control over deadly violence, and national leaders will want some control over deadly violence. Even a democratized United Nations would move control further from the hands of parties that very much want it. If, on the other hand, we believe the data that nonviolence is more effective than violence, then no war machine is needed — which is of course the reason many of us see for trying to get rid of war.Ranney gives some examples of what he calls “strong†international law, such as the WTO, but they do not involve militarism. It’s unclear why a strong use of the laws against war need use war in violation of itself. Discussing enforcement of a nuclear weapons ban, Ranney writes: “a recalcitrant international outlier must be treated in basically the same manner as a domestic murderer.†Yes. Good. But that requires no armed “peace force.†Murderers are not typically dealt with by bombing everyone around them (the justifications for attacking Afghanistan in 2001 being an obvious and disastrous exception to that rule).Ranney also supports as an afterthought what I think ought to be central to this project. He writes: “Not that a UNPF [United Nations Peace Force] ought to be engaged in nothing but the application of force. On the contrary, there ought to be a ‘peace and reconciliation’ force that makes full use of conflict resolution and other nonviolent approaches, something like the existing Non-Violent Peaceforce. There would need to be diverse types of peace forces, appropriately staffed and trained to focus on diverse challenges.â€But why make this superior approach a side note? And how does doing so differ from what we’ve got right now?Well, again, Ranney is proposing a democratized U.N. not dominated by five big war makers and weapons dealers. This is a major point of agreement. Whether you cling to violence or not, the first question is how to bring the United States and its allies into the world community of law — including how to democratize or replace the United Nations.But when envisioning a democratized world body, let’s not envision it using the tools of the Middle Ages, albeit with horrific technological advances. This parallels in my mind science fiction dramas in which humans have learned space travel but are extremely eager to initiate fist fights. That’s not a likely reality. Neither is a world in which the United States has abandoned rogue-nation status while the customary interaction between nations consists of bombing people.Getting to a world beyond war without using war to do so is not a matter of personal purity, but of maximizing the likelihood of success.
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law PDF
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law EPub
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law Doc
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law iBooks
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law rtf
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law Mobipocket
World Peace Through Law: Replacing War with the Global Rule of Law Kindle
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar