Sri Lanka and Rwanda elicit a sense of victimhood upon which their respective foreign policies have been built.
The disjuncture between kinetic elements of American COIN doctrine and the nation-building mission inherent to ‘new’ conflicts lies at the root of ongoing difficulties.
The Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq was a story of neo-conservative ideas (militarism, morality, and democracy) about the role of America in the world.
The legal success of the Genocide Convention continues to re-establish the norm politically, albeit under misinterpretation and without effect of prevention.
‘Hard’ & ‘soft’ power are competing approaches to power in IR. Soft power is increasingly effective & hard power less so; ‘smart power’ offers a promising third strategy.
Though national security frameworks may hinder pragmatic cooperation, securitising climate change is advantageous in planning for a clear and increasingly present danger.
Individuals & organizations are increasingly gaining traction in a state-dominant international legal order, a piecemeal process that may result in a global constitution.
Humanitarian Intervention marks a struggle at the foundations of international law. This struggle is an ongoing one, as evidenced by its instances of abuse and failure.
Human rights are most powerfully enforced through horizontal and vertical transnational legal processes, and the resulting internalisation and socialisation of values.
Cultural relativism should not be an excuse to avoid the difficulties of enforcing an individualistic human rights system in communities believing in collective rights.
Though it provides a solid basis for determining the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention in theory, the English School encounters certain challenges in practice.
The intervention in East Timor illustrated how armed force can save lives, but intervention in Kosovo failed to provide a long-term solution and did more harm than good.