Classic Liberalism

Improved Essays
Classic liberalism, which originates from the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, assumes that the international system is anarchic but also believes that peace is possible for peace through cooperation. Liberals believe that the international law "is a way of structuring "patterns of individual and group interaction in transnational society, patterns which, in turn, create interests that make up and constrain state action," (Burly, 1993-230). Liberals also stress the importance of liberal values, such as democracy, within the international system. In light of the current level of civilian abuse in conflict, the liberal theory could argue that the level of civilian abuse stems from the ineffective structuring capability of the law. However, it could …show more content…
The first explanation indicates that the institutions themselves, which are seen as legitimate enforcers, may have failed at promoting the civilian immunity principle in adequate manner despite the readiness and willingness of states to cooperate and abide by the law. There is another flip side of that argument which argues that the international system has been unreceptive to the cooperation and enforcement tactics the institutions have showed. Either way, the neoliberal institutionalists believe that the law is ineffective because, for one reason or another, institutions were unable to establish enough cooperation on the issue of human rights during conflict. Once again, the major weakness of the law is the lack of …show more content…
In recent years, the international law has seen its importance growing precisely because of the work exerted by international institutions, such as the UN, and the ICC. These institutions should be more responsible if they want to see broader application of the international law, particularly during armed conflict. However, the shortcomings and inequalities of the law are still not tackled. The specific provisions causing the law to fail are ignored by the institutionalist theory. The fact that specific groups, such as children, women and disappeared persons are left out from the law is not contained in the neoliberal institutionalist assertion. Neoliberal institutionalism cannot truly explain or highlight the reasons behind the ineffectiveness of the international law of armed conflict.
Neoliberal theorists, such as Arthur Stein, believe that international organizations organize state behavior and deliver directions for proper reactions to curtail these costs (Stein, 1983 - 12). The material costs which states may sustain as a result of non-compliance with the laws of war, however, remain unclear. While the events at Abu Ghraib did a major blow to international credibility, some countries could not quantify those costs and weigh them in advance against the benefits of rising intelligence or intimidation

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    However, this shows the R2P doctrine has no actual value when the interests of major powers are at stake. For instance, Gaddafi was politically isolated while Assad has close military and commercial ties with Russia and China, two nations with veto power in the UNSC. Indeed, Russia and China have consistently vetoed UNSC resolutions that call for action in Syria. Therefore, even though the war in Syria is the very type of situation R2P was designed to prevent, it is unlikely R2P will be authorized to use force in Syria. This calls into question whether R2P is meant to protect all nations that experience acts of mass violence or just nations with weak allies.…

    • 1304 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Such resolutions do not per se create binding international law (Ibid). Unfortunately, the international law is a matter of resistance for the smaller hands, as shown by the Marshall Islands’ decision to use litigation as a strategy to further discuss the issue of nuclear disarmament. This may generate tensions in the international relations scene between the United Kingdom and the Marshall Islands. Also, the ICJ bias results from the judges that were once diplomats or agents of the state. This indicates loop-holes in the Statute and the development of the international law.…

    • 1864 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Fred Fleitz Analysis

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Also his failed program to train Syrian rebels left and opportunity for Russia and Iran to step up. Fleitz views this as a huge weakness leaving those small deployments vulnerable for capture with no back up and an embarrassment to American credibility. The Obama administration 's actions are passive and have a peace keeping effort driving it but from a realist point of view, they are viewed as spineless and exploitable. Fleitz believes that war is unavoidable and America needs to show their strength in the Middle East so the war is not brought overseas because peace is unachievable. Fleitz also comments on Middle East allies shifting because of Obama 's “non-policy”.…

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The author does not support the view expressed by other scholars that ideological, political and economic differences among states will be the primary driver of conflict among states. As I have indicated earlier, this analysis is shallow and lacks both historical and empirical evidence. If his examination is strictly followed, there will be a basis for economic conflict. There is a hug economic disparity among the civilisations. However, he thinks this will not be enough to cause conflict among the civilisations.…

    • 1442 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    They were given this responsibility by Parliament and it is an important role they must fulfil. The judiciary tend to use deference on national security matters because they are not experts on the issue. However, deference might not be the correct decision in all cases because most cases are on matters of procedure, rather than expertise; in those cases the courts should not refuse to decide the cases on the basis that they are security decisions and outside their expertise . The fact the government and Parliament are best placed to assess risk for national security can be questioned since they were wrong on the fact that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction after the invasion . Their decision making can always be questioned by the fact that Mr. Jean Charles de Menezes was shot in the head on the assumption that he was a suicide bomber when he was not .…

    • 1936 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The primary goal of the League was to prevent conflicts between the nations, and it could not do that because of the ineffectiveness of the League as a whole. The Treaty of Versailles had many amends that the League of Nations was supposed to enforce, but was not enforced. Critics argued that the League was not reassuring because the League had to have actions approved by individuals that were apart of the council. The United States sat on the edge of the unjust Treaty of Versailles and also on the edge of the League of Nations, for it was not an actual member of the League. Also, because of the prior treaty made the League set the stage for an even more devastating outcome that no one…

    • 778 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    After WW1, the winners which were the United States, United Kingdom, and France adapted the underlying principles of liberalism that has been practiced since the 17th and 18th centuries to try and avoid war. Liberal thought is grounded in a notion that human nature is good, not evil, meaning that states thrive in a world governed by morality and law. States want to cooperate to achieve mutual goals in peace. Just like realism, liberalism derives from the observations and interpretations of political situations. Liberalism argues for human rights, parliamentary democracy, and free trade, while also maintaining that all such goals begin within the state.…

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Also, American revolutionaries showed a significant degree of passion but none enforced those revolutionary ideas and the American Declaration of rights were reserved for those with political human status. Thus, these articles have an intentional limited scope and without political interest, human rights cannot exist. Neo-liberals see international institutions like these doctrines as facilitators of cooperation however, evidence shows that cooperation “will not happen unless states make it happen” and will only do so if the institutions “work to.. serve their interests” (Baylis and Smith). Secular governments provide the political recognition for these rights to be respected however, their application is questionable. For instance, states that ratify the declaration and covenant of human rights can abandon the document at any point and have done so during chaotic political atmosphere.…

    • 1428 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Debate regarding this subject is generally divided into two groups of observers. The realists believe that when it comes to defend their self-interest and it should not hesitate to take up arms against another state in self-defense. On the other hand, Intervention is a verified form of a more generous attempt to bring peace and save innocent people. Intervention has hardly been accepted by global community and advocates of those interventions are limited. In the cases of states which were not able to protect their citizens and human rights for example “Cuba”, “Zimbabwe” and “North Korea””1(Bellamy 2010:365)” categorized universal regulation in specific sections 2, 39 and 51 in UN agreement statuses any events of severe human cruelty is an incident for global distress and a moral ground to interfere “2” (Simma 1999:1).It is unquestionably a rational obligation that the global society ought to step in when a sectional community in a sovereign state is getting reprimanded for a systematic purpose by its government.…

    • 2153 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He does not argue that torture should be used casually, rather his argument stems from the premise that nations should not be so quick to ban torture in every single circumstance. His primary rhetorical strategy is to use hypothetical extremes to prove his point, in addition, he also appeals to emotion to evoke a sense towards Utilitarianism to justify torture in certain cases. His primary downfall in his argument was that many of his hypothetical have yet to be seen in real life, in light of this, it may delegitimize his argument in certain people’s…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays