拒绝习惯倒退:单边人道主义干预与习惯国际法的演变

Elisabeth Elisabeth
{"title":"拒绝习惯倒退:单边人道主义干预与习惯国际法的演变","authors":"Elisabeth Elisabeth","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Humanitarian intervention is perhaps one of the most important topics in international affairs. It raises questions of morality and militarism, becoming a platform for sharp debate in international law. This note discusses both the moral and legal questions presented by unilateral humanitarian intervention (“UHI”). It argues that UHI is antithetical to the progression of customary international law due to customary international law’s evolutive nature and the ongoing importance of decolonization. UHI is not only normatively undesirable, but the particular normative criticisms of the doctrine – that it is regressively imperialist and neo-colonial – render it fundamentally incompatible with customary international law.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rejecting Customary Regression: Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention & the Evolution of Customary International Law\",\"authors\":\"Elisabeth Elisabeth\",\"doi\":\"10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Humanitarian intervention is perhaps one of the most important topics in international affairs. It raises questions of morality and militarism, becoming a platform for sharp debate in international law. This note discusses both the moral and legal questions presented by unilateral humanitarian intervention (“UHI”). It argues that UHI is antithetical to the progression of customary international law due to customary international law’s evolutive nature and the ongoing importance of decolonization. UHI is not only normatively undesirable, but the particular normative criticisms of the doctrine – that it is regressively imperialist and neo-colonial – render it fundamentally incompatible with customary international law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":331401,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人道主义干预也许是国际事务中最重要的议题之一。它提出了道德和军国主义的问题,成为国际法激烈辩论的平台。本说明讨论单边人道主义干预所带来的道德和法律问题。它认为,由于习惯国际法的演变性质和非殖民化的持续重要性,热岛倡议与习惯国际法的发展是对立的。热岛岛不仅在规范上不受欢迎,而且对该学说的具体规范批评- -它是倒退的帝国主义和新殖民主义- -使它从根本上与习惯国际法不相容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rejecting Customary Regression: Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention & the Evolution of Customary International Law
Humanitarian intervention is perhaps one of the most important topics in international affairs. It raises questions of morality and militarism, becoming a platform for sharp debate in international law. This note discusses both the moral and legal questions presented by unilateral humanitarian intervention (“UHI”). It argues that UHI is antithetical to the progression of customary international law due to customary international law’s evolutive nature and the ongoing importance of decolonization. UHI is not only normatively undesirable, but the particular normative criticisms of the doctrine – that it is regressively imperialist and neo-colonial – render it fundamentally incompatible with customary international law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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