European Review of International Studies最新文献_第8页

Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg and Stefan Bernhard (eds), Charting Transnational Fields. Methodology for a Political Sociology of Knowledge (Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2020) 克里斯蒂安·施密特-韦伦伯格和斯特凡·伯恩哈德主编，《跨国领域图表》。知识的政治社会学方法论(阿宾登和纽约:劳特利奇，2020)

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-08020010

A. Pacher

引用次数: 0

Lead Groups in EU Foreign Policy: The Cases of Iran and Ukraine 欧盟外交政策的领导小组:伊朗和乌克兰的案例

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-08020016

Riccardo Alcaro, Marco Siddi

引用次数: 6

Jacek Więcławski, Understanding Realism in Contemporary International Relations: Beyond the Structural Realist Perspective (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag, 2019) Jacek Więcławski，理解当代国际关系中的现实主义:超越结构现实主义视角(巴登-巴登:Nomos出版社，2019)

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-08020009

Konstantinos Kostagiannis

引用次数: 0

Matthieu Cimino (ed.), Syria: Borders, boundaries, and the state (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020) 马修·西米诺主编，《叙利亚:边界、边界和国家》(纽约:帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦出版社，2020年)

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-08020012

Nerouz Satik

引用次数: 0

Simon Le Roulley and Mathieu Uhel (eds), Chercheur.es critiques en terrains critiques [Critical Researchers in Critical Fields] (Paris: Le Bord de l’Eau, 2020) Simon Le Roulley和Mathieu Uhel(编)，Critical research in Critical Fields(巴黎:Le Bord de l ' eau, 2020)

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-08020001

G. Beaud

引用次数: 0

The Trade Policies of Brexit Britain: the Influence of and Impacts on the Devolved Nations 英国脱欧后的贸易政策:对权力下放国家的影响和冲击

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2021-04-07 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-BJA10034

David Eiser, N. McEwen, G. Roy

引用次数: 2

The Pitfalls and Promises of Human Rights Claims in the Chechen Wars: Russia at the European Court 车臣战争中人权主张的陷阱与承诺:欧洲法庭上的俄罗斯

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-BJA10024

M. Evangelista

{"title":"The Pitfalls and Promises of Human Rights Claims in the Chechen Wars: Russia at the European Court","authors":"M. Evangelista","doi":"10.1163/21967415-BJA10024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/21967415-BJA10024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Russia’s brutal wars against the separatist republic of Chechnya, starting in the mid-1990s, entailed untold numbers of war crimes and human rights abuses, including kidnapping, extrajudicial killings, torture, murder, and vast destruction of property and civilian life by aerial bombardment and artillery barrages. Blocked from pursuing justice through the Russian courts or by having the Russian government fulfill its obligations under the Geneva Conventions, victims instead worked with activists and lawyers to bring cases before the European Court of Human Rights. Starting in 2003, the Court has found against Russia in some 250 cases – in effect bringing the higher standards of human rights law to the domain of armed conflict, normally regulated (with mixed success) by international humanitarian law (“laws of war”). The first step in the process of understanding this normative change is to identify and understand the transformation: from a normative standpoint, the Court rulings constitute a major achievement for civilian protections during wartime; they build on earlier precedents in cases against Turkey and the United Kingdom, which not only expand protections for civilians but also extend the espace juridique of the Court’s competence beyond Europe to include, for example, British military forces in Iraq. The second step provides a social-sciences perspective by adding an empirical dimension to the study of these cases. We see that the actual consequences of the Court’s decisions on the military practices of Russia and other states have been limited and may even portend a backlash that could undermine protections for civilians in warfare. The last step of normative analysis suggests that even if appeals to a court of human rights might not serve the goal of reducing war crimes in general, the use of human-rights norms retains a certain plausibility to the extent that if offers victims an opportunity to present their claims and seek remedies.","PeriodicalId":145597,"journal":{"name":"European Review of International Studies","volume":"109 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123315192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Why the Ethics of War needs the Social Sciences 战争伦理学为什么需要社会科学

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-BJA10022

Ariel Colonomos

{"title":"Why the Ethics of War needs the Social Sciences","authors":"Ariel Colonomos","doi":"10.1163/21967415-BJA10022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/21967415-BJA10022","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This paper argues that, for both sociological and epistemic reasons, the ethics of war needs the social sciences and, accordingly, sets an alternative to the two prevailing approaches in the literature in the ethics of war field, i.e. the just war tradition model and the ethics of war theory. Given what we learn from the factual description of war and its interpretation in the social sciences, and given what their epistemic premises are, both models - and more particularly the second one – fail to address important normative issues that arise in the course of warfare. Based on the discussion of two case studies – states’ policy in the face of hostage-taking and the rule of proportionality – I argue it is important to move beyond the divide between a state-centric approach (the just war tradition) and an individualistic one (the ethics of war theory): it is indispensable to take into consideration other social spheres where norms emerge and find, between those spheres, some ‘overlapping normative ground’. I argue, both sociologically and normatively, that norms rely upon interlocking sets of expectations. I also argue that these social expectations need to be thoroughly examined in order to ascertain the plausibility of norms in warfare. As a conclusion, for reasons that are both sociological and normative, I stress the political importance, within a liberal and knowledge-oriented society, of the access to facts that always need to be interpreted when making normative claims.","PeriodicalId":145597,"journal":{"name":"European Review of International Studies","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122582460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Moral Psychology, Neuroscience, and Non-Combatant Immunity 道德心理学，神经科学和非战斗人员免疫

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-BJA10020

R. Price

引用次数: 0

Deontology, Consequentialism and Reciprocity in Contemporary Just War Thinking 当代正义战争思想中的义务论、结果主义与互惠主义

European Review of International Studies Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI: 10.1163/21967415-BJA10021

Chris D. Brown

引用次数: 1