University of Colorado – Denver Notes 10.1 - 10.2 Windham E. Loopesko INTB 3000 Fall 2013 University of Colorado – Denver October 21-24, 2013 Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1 – International law and organizations as paths to peace International law – a sizable body developed despite the absence of a central authority Two types: Private (commerce, communications, travel) Public (between governments and organizations – the rest of this lecture) Looking back on course 30-40 years from now, quaint -- typewriters and punch cards Equally valid viewpoints – best run companies have both, American strength Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1 – State sovereignty There is no legal authority above the state; any authority over its actions voluntarily conferred States have certain rights Continued existence (the right of self-defense) Independence (managing affairs w/o interference) Legal equality with other states Duties – non-intervention; carrying out obligations (as long as nothing changes . . . ) Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1 – Limitations of international law Lack of legislative body making binding rules Lack of judicial body w/ compulsory jurisdiction to identify breaches and compel enforcement Absent institutions with enforcement capability, it can become an instrument of the powerful justifying self-help without regard to justice States observe as long-term interests served by shared expectations and avoiding chaos Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1 – The notion of just war International law does not impose peace. War may be justified in certain circumstances, if Just cause; the objective is morally good Right intention -- The war is for good reasons – to correct wrong or establish peace not revenge or malicious motives Last resort -- All other means of resolving the conflict have been exhausted Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1 – Just war 2 More criteria for a just war: Political proportionality – the harm caused by the fighting must not outweigh the good from the war Declaration by a legitimate authority – the war must be declared by appropriate leaders (preferably an international organization) Discrimination – Civilians cannot be targeted Military proportionality – Destruction must be kept to a minimum Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.1– Duty to protect Increasingly, countries feel a duty to stop brutal human rights violations and stop genocide, as Human rights are an international entitlement Governments violating human rights lose legitimacy The international community has a responsibility to halt such violations The result – sovereignty no longer sacrosanct; war criminals must be brought to justice (ICC) Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.2 – Liberals and collective security Liberals who reject the balance of power seek peace through collective security Collective security – a community of nations united to resist aggression Collective security came out of World War I; it failed in its first incarnation – the League of Nations, but has been gaining strength since Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.2 – Elements of collective security Collective security is based upon the following notions of statecraft: All threats to peace are a concern to all nations All states should be members of the collective security organization Organization members should pledge to resolve disputes through peaceful means If peace is breach, nations will respond robustly Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013

Week 10.2 – Collective security and the United Nations Security Council (15 members, 5 permanent with veto) decides collective security questions Despite vetoes, the UN is increasingly involved in peacekeeping operations NATO plays a larger collective defense role Other regional groups are attracting greater interest Paths to peace 10/21-10/24 2013