Foreign Election Interference and International Law

Chimène I. Keitner
{"title":"Foreign Election Interference and International Law","authors":"Chimène I. Keitner","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3599586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the possibilities, and limitations, of international law in regulating states’ attempts to influence each other’s elections. The principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, self-determination, and nonintervention reflect core understandings about the attributes and entitlements of states in the international system. The chapter begins by tracing attempts to further codify the nonintervention principle in the 1960s and 1970s. It then examines the tension produced by states’ conflicting desires to preserve the greatest possible freedom of action for themselves and to constrain the behavior of others. To date, this dynamic has impeded the ability to formulate explicit treaty-based solutions to the problem of foreign election interference. Identifying customary international law in this area requires inferring specific conduct-regulating rules from general principles, which can yield contested results. States are unlikely to agree to more granular, binding international rules as long as regimes currently in power benefit from constructive ambiguity. Although agreement on more concrete rules and enforcement mechanisms might remain elusive, like-minded states should continue to emphasize the importance of supporting peoples’ abilities to determine their own political destinies. This requires, at a minimum, promoting an antideception norm as a matter of both domestic and international law.","PeriodicalId":152648,"journal":{"name":"Defending Democracies","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Defending Democracies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3599586","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This chapter explores the possibilities, and limitations, of international law in regulating states’ attempts to influence each other’s elections. The principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, self-determination, and nonintervention reflect core understandings about the attributes and entitlements of states in the international system. The chapter begins by tracing attempts to further codify the nonintervention principle in the 1960s and 1970s. It then examines the tension produced by states’ conflicting desires to preserve the greatest possible freedom of action for themselves and to constrain the behavior of others. To date, this dynamic has impeded the ability to formulate explicit treaty-based solutions to the problem of foreign election interference. Identifying customary international law in this area requires inferring specific conduct-regulating rules from general principles, which can yield contested results. States are unlikely to agree to more granular, binding international rules as long as regimes currently in power benefit from constructive ambiguity. Although agreement on more concrete rules and enforcement mechanisms might remain elusive, like-minded states should continue to emphasize the importance of supporting peoples’ abilities to determine their own political destinies. This requires, at a minimum, promoting an antideception norm as a matter of both domestic and international law.
外国选举干预与国际法
本章探讨了国际法在规范国家试图影响彼此选举方面的可能性和局限性。主权、领土完整、政治独立、自决和不干涉原则反映了对国际体系中国家属性和权利的核心理解。本章首先追溯了20世纪60年代和70年代进一步编纂不干涉原则的尝试。然后,它考察了国家为维护自己最大的行动自由和约束他人行为的冲突欲望所产生的紧张关系。迄今为止,这种动态阻碍了为外国干涉选举问题制定明确的基于条约的解决办法的能力。确定这方面的习惯国际法需要从一般原则推断出具体的行为管制规则,这可能产生有争议的结果。只要目前掌权的政权受益于建设性的模棱两可,各国就不太可能同意更细致、更有约束力的国际规则。虽然可能难以就更具体的规则和执行机制达成协议,但志同道合的国家应继续强调支持各国人民决定自己政治命运的能力的重要性。这至少需要在国内法和国际法中促进反欺骗规范。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信