Abstract
International law began as a discipline concerned with the goal of peace, and has become the basis for organizing, managing and regulating relations between states in the maintenance of international peace and security. International law underpins a number of strategies and institutions focusing on different and sometimes contradictory, but related, priorities in the global quest for peace, including the concepts of state sovereignty, non-intervention and self-determination; the processes of collective security, humanitarian intervention and responsibility to protect (R2P); and the treaty-based systems to prevent and prosecute genocide, protect human rights and pursue arms control and disarmament.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It has been suggested that the emergent norm of responsibility to protect allows for the use of force in the absence of UNSC authorization or the right of self-defence, but both the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty are clear that the UNSC is central to obtaining consensus on the use of military force under R2P. United Nations, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (New York: United Nations, 2004);
ICISS, The Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre, 2001).
L. McGregor, ‘Reconciliation: Where Is the Law?’ in Law and the Politics of Reconciliation, ed. S. Veitch (Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate, 2007), 117.
O. P. Richmond, The Transformation of Peace (London/New York: Routledge, 2007);
O. P. Richmond, ‘The Rule of Law in Liberal Peacebuilding’, in Peacebuilding and the Rule of Law in Africa: Just Peace? eds. C. L. Sriram, O. Martin-Ortega and J. Herman (London/New York: Routledge, 2011), 44–59.
D. Cortright, Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 45.
N. D. White, International Conflict and Security Law (Cheltenham, Glos: Edward Elgar, 2014), 21.
K. Sikkink, The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions Are Changing World Politics (New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2011);
D. F. Orentlicher, ‘Settling Accounts: The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime’, Yale Law Journal 100, no. 8 (1991): 2537–2615; Note, however, that ending impunity may be regarded more broadly in international law than prosecutions in the formal Western legal system.
J. Braithwaite, ‘Conclusion: Hope and Humility for Weavers with International Law’, in The Role of International Law in Rebuilding Societies after Conflict: Great Expectations, eds B. Bowden, H. Charlesworth and J. Farrall (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 274.
C. Stahn, ‘“Jus ad Bellum”, “Jus in Bello” … “Just Post Bellum”? Rethinking the Conception of the Law of Armed Force’, European Journal of International Law 17, no. 5 (2007): 921–943.
L. May, ‘Transitional Justice and the Just War Tradition’, in Critical Perspectives in Transitional Justice, eds N. Palmer, P. Clark and D. Granville (Cambridge, UK: Intersentia, 2012), 17–29.
M. J. Allman and T. L. Wright, After the Smoke Clears: The Just War Tradition and Post War Justice (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2010).
V. Chetail, ‘Introduction: Post-conflict Peacebuilding — Ambiguity and Identity’, in Post-conflict Peacebuilding: A Lexicon (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2009), 18.
B. Orend, ‘Jus Post Bellum: The Perspective of a Just-War Theorist’, Leiden Journal of International Law 20 (2007): 571–591.
R. Paris, ‘International Peacekeeping and the “Mission Civilisatrice”’, Review of International Studies 28 (2002): 637–656.
A. Jeng, Peacebuilding in the African Union: Law, Philosophy and Practice (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 36.
C. L. Sriram, ‘Transitional Justice and the Liberal Peace’, in New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding, eds E. Newman, R. Paris and O. P. Richmond (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2009), 112–129.
R. G. Teitel, ‘Rethinking Jus Post Bellum in an Age of Global Transitional Justice’, in Globalizing Transitional Justice: Contemporary Essays (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2014), 139–148.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 Wendy Lambourne
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lambourne, W. (2016). International Law: To End the Scourge of War … and to Build a Just Peace?. In: Richmond, O.P., Pogodda, S., Ramović, J. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Disciplinary and Regional Approaches to Peace. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40761-0_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40761-0_19
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-40760-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-40761-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)