Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International LawCharlotte Ku, Harold K. Jacobson Cambridge University Press, 13 בפבר׳ 2003 - 440 עמודים The spread of democracy to a majority of the world's states and the legitimization of the use of force by multilateral institutions such as NATO and the UN have been two key developments since World War II. In the last decade these developments have become intertwined, as multilateral forces moved from traditional peacekeeping to peace enforcement among warring parties. This book explores the experiences of nine countries (Canada, France, Germany, India, Japan, Norway, Russia, UK and US) in the deployment of armed forces under the UN and NATO, asking who has been and should be accountable to the citizens of these nations, and to the citizens of states who are the object of deployments, for the decisions made in the such military actions. The authors conclude that national-level mechanisms have been most important in assuring democratic accountability of national and international decision-makers. |
תוכן
Broaching the issues | 3 |
The domestic and international context | 37 |
The interface of national constitutional systems with international law and institutions on using military forces changing trends in executive and legisl... | 39 |
Domestic political factors and decisions to use military forces | 61 |
Collective security peacekeeping and ad hoc multilateralism | 81 |
The legal responsibility of military personnel | 104 |
Traditional contributors to international military operations | 125 |
Canada committed contributor of ideas and forces but with growing doubts and problems | 127 |
Germany ensuring political legitimacy for the use of military forces by requiring constitutional accountability | 231 |
Russian Federation the pendulum of powers and accountability | 257 |
France Security Council legitimacy and executive primacy | 280 |
The United Kingdom increasing commitment requires greater parliamentary involvement | 300 |
The United States democracy hegemony and accountability | 323 |
Toward a mixed system of democratic accountability | 349 |
Appendix A | 384 |
Appendix B | 399 |
Norway political consensus and the problem of accountability | 154 |
India democratic poor internationalist | 176 |
Japan moderate commitment within legal strictures | 207 |
References | 415 |
| 430 | |
מהדורות אחרות - הצג הכל
מונחים וביטויים נפוצים
approval armed forces Article authorization Bosnia Bundestag cabinet Canada Canadian civilian coalition collective security command commitment Committee conflict Congress constitutional contribution countries debate decision decision-making defense democracies democratic accountability deploy deployment domestic Dutchbat East Timor enforcement actions established executive Foreign Affairs foreign policy France Germany Grundgesetz Gulf Gulf War India international auspices international humanitarian law international institutions International Law intervention Intra-state involvement issues Japan Japanese KFOR Korean Kosovo legislative mandate military forces military personnel multilateral NATO NATO's Norway Norwegian Observer Mission ONUC Operation Allied Force organization parliament parliamentary participation parties peace and security peace operations Peacekeeping Law peacekeeping operations political president prime minister responsibility role Russian Federation Secretary-General Security Council Somalia Soviet Srebrenica tion tional traditional peacekeeping troops UN Charter UN Security Council United Kingdom United Nations University Press UNOSOM II UNPROFOR UNSC UNSC Resolution vote World Yugoslavia