Search

This paper seeks to assess the extent to which the Responsibility to Protect has helped build international consensus around measures likely to improve the world's performance in relation to post-conflict reconstruction. The third element of R2P, the 'responsibility to rebuild' proved much less controversial than the other elements and has spawned a new institution - the UN Peacebuilding Commission. This paper opens by setting out the problems associated with 'rebuilding' and argues that it is better to conceptualise these activities as a form of 'transformation'. Key practical problems include political dilemmas about when and how to transfer political power to local actors, what sort of economy to foster, how to manage security sector reform, and how to enable local reconciliation. The second part of the paper focuses on the creation of the UN peacebuilding commission and assesses the extent to which it is likely to be able to overcome these problems. The third section focuses on the relationship between rebuilding and the R2P's concept of 'reaction'. It examines the case of Timor-Leste in order to identify problems associated with the too rapid withdrawal of international assistance and two recent cases (Sierra Leone and Burundi) where UN peacekeepers have handed over to civilian peacebuilders coordinated by the peacebuilding commission inorder to understand how this transition might be made more smoothly.The final section examines the extent to which 'rebuilding' is related to the responsibility to prevent. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the theoretical overview of the first paper, this paper will explore the nature and evolution of the challenges of privatization. It will discuss disuss past experience with privatiztion and explore both the pros and cons of privatization. Its focus will be on the ethics of privatization. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between Global Ethics and International Politics: Can the Claims of the poor be voiced? This paper looks at the debates that are taking place since the end of the Cold War in the international arena about ethics. The initial discussions of the role of ethics in international relations set the agenda for a new thinking about the relations of actors and organizations within the international system. Gradually some of these discussions developed into debates about global ethics to address issues identified under rubric of global justice such as poverty, global disease, and of course most recently the climate change. In most of these debates the concern has been to engage with people who are considered to be vulnerable and mostly in developing countries. In number of disciplines these concerns are expressed in various conceptual frameworks informing policy articulations. For instance in IR the debates on Humanitarianism, in developmental economics and development studies in general discussions on capabilities, on participation have been taking place as well as policy initiatives such as the UK Prime Minister’s the commission for Africa initiative. The paper asks two questions: whether there has been a change at the level of ontological assumptions in think about vulnerable people in this shift from international to global ethics. And What are the methodological implications of such shift for opening up a space for a discussion from within the targeted vulnerable people. This paper develops from an interdisciplinary perspective : the questions posed are coming out of my ongoing research on HIV/AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa which ahs been one of the debates located in the Global Justice/ethics debates, and the conceptual framework is developed through the philosophy and the implications are relevant for both IR and development studies. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thomas Hobbes is typically associated in international relations theory with the realist tradition. Conversely, he is often depicted as hostile to the idea of morality in international affairs and to the just war tradition in particular. It is curious then that Hobbes associated his own project quite closely with that of Hugo Grotius, the so-called father of International Law, and that later just war thinkers such as Pufendorf and Vattel engaged rather vigorously with Hobbes? work. Indeed, even in the 20th century, Michael Walzer treats Hobbes? thoughts pertaining to anticipatory war alongside these more standard just war thinkers, as does Richard Tuck. Perhaps this is not surprising when once considers that Hobbes was concerned with the question of when the use of force is appropriate in international relations, and that he invoked the idea of natural law in his writings. Hobbes? enquiries, then, were constituted to some degree by just war-oriented questions. Yet there is also good reason for deeming Hobbes an alien to the just war tradition. For a start, the response which he offered to these just war questions suggest a negation of the very idea of just war. His conviction that international affairs reflects a war of all against all precludes even the possibility of a tranquillitas ordinas, a touchstone commitment within the just war tradition. This paper will examine how we may relate Thomas Hobbes to the just war tradition. It will pay particular attention to how we construct the parameters of the just war tradition as to include or exclude a thinker such as Thomas Hobbes. According to J.G.A. Gunnell, traditions, such as that of the just war, comprise nothing more than retrospective analytical constructions which produce a rationalized version of the past. He argues that they represent mythologies composed by those who invoke them. Moreover, each and every such mythology is designed to serve particular ends, to privilege some reading of history or other, and to provide us with a crib-sheet for dealing with the problems facing us today. Inevitably, each such reading serves to circumscribe the potential development of the tradition in question in different ways. For instance, they may posit the recognition of some timeless truths or normative commitments as constitutive of the tradition, or they may associate the tradition with the heritage of a cluster of carefully selected classical thinkers. Accordingly, where new thinking strays from these templates it may be disregarded as falling beyond the bounds of the tradition. This has been the fate of Thomas Hobbes. This paper looks to examine why this has been the case. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few words of our moral vocabulary are as powerful as ?humanity?. It is for the sake of humanity that we are enjoined to redistribute global wealth to the disadvantaged, save strangers from acts that shock the conscience of humankind, and conduct ourselves in such a way that it does not harm others. Humanity is something that everyone is ?for? and no one is against, at least publicly against. Indeed, much of what we take for international obligation would appear to be strange or unintelligible if we were suddenly deprived of the language of humanity and the values it implies. The difficulty with this manner of thinking is that it runs up against the claims of states, only to be dismissed as an elusive if not illusory ideal. The purpose of this paper is to break free of what is often portrayed as an irreconcilable tension by providing an account of man and citizen that redeems the claims of both. By that I mean: I want to provide an account of this relation that ascribes positive value to individuals as well as to the political communities in which they live. In doing so, I want to rely upon and thereby recover the Thomist tradition of natural law. For one of the central contentions of this paper is that contemporary cosmopolitan theories of obligation rest on incomplete systems of thought because, in their international relations manifestations, they do not address crucial meta-ethical questions that probe the authority of reason in particular as well as the value of humanity itself. A Thomist approach can answer these questions, because the place it gives to God in theorising various orders of law, and thereby provide a powerful and coherent account of the common good that the idea of humanity implies. The essay will conclude by reflecting on the difficulties of theorising humanity without God as well as the relevance of such an approach in a secular world in which we (ordinarily) have no recourse to God. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The experience of the body in pain is a phenomenon that fundamentally defies attempts at visual representation. Beyond the obvious claim that an image can never unproblematically represent the complexity of a lived reality, the visceral experience of pain as a tactile phenomenon both animates and confounds attempts to 'make sense' of pain within the logic of a political culture that relies for its ethical bearings on the verifiability associated with visuality. Despite its inherent impossibility, the image of the body in pain animates a whole host of often contradictory political activities, from torture to military intervention to famine relief to critical International Relations scholarship, and it is not a facile process to adjudicate between the ethical logics of these on the basis of intentionality alone. Indeed, all rely on a technologic of visualisation to validate their respective projects, and many rely on the circulation of abject imagery. This technologic fetishizes pain in its drive to make visible what is essentially unimagable - that is, the tactile experience of the body in extreme pain (Scarry: 1984). The body in pain is thus produced as an aesthetic visual image, a symbolic icon which stands in for itself in the singularity of representation associated with the visual. At the very least, the strategies associated with visualising the disaster of pain are profoundly objectifying - we produce or regard wounded, bleeding, starving, shattered, twisted, nameless disembodied bodies who are thereby reduced to shadows - to rumours of themselves. Following an exploration of the visualisation of prisoners' bodies in the case of the torture at Abu Ghraib in 2004, this paper will argue that the sovereign inscription of pain through torture and war has been followed by a fetishization of pain through the re-circulation of imagery for the intended purposes of opposing or resisting these practices. Yet, the drive to circulate ad nauseum the icon of the body in pain for 'ethical' academic projects is to risk the reproduction of the same logic of violence that animated the production of pain in the first place; that is, the image of the abject. The paper will therefore explore the visual logic that is associated with the imaging of pain, not to suggest that the circulation of such imagery is commensurate with the torture that produced it, but to argue that the logic of the visual image in both cases risks the final obliteration of the human subject whose world is already undone by the experience of extreme tactile pain.Toward this end, the paper will explore the profound limitations associated with the reliance on visuality to 'make sense' of our worlds - limitations which also form the conceptual basis for its seductive allure. Indeed, the imperative to make visible the body in pain is simultaneously an attempt to defy the consuming scope of its tactility. The image of pain forms the assurance of its comprehensibility. The image provides limits and contours to pain within its own framing practices, announcing pain within a bounded zone of intelligibility. It allows us to retreat from the potential limitlessness - the absolute disaster - of human pain that haunts all of our projects and ethical beginnings. Finally, overlaying the analysis surrounding the production, visualisation, and circulation of pain, the paper will take as a central problematic the question of whether it is possible to de-centre visuality as the basic orientation of our political imaginaries, and what this might mean for a more ethical engagement with the politics of pain. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper makes three linked arguments adding up to a vision of how the field of IR might evolve towards greater agreement on the need for and the nature of moral responsibility in scholarship. First, I claim that the discussion of responsibility in scholarship is made difficult by basic ontological and epistemological disagreements between "mainstream" and "critical" approaches in IR. I sketch these disagreements in the first part of the paper and show that they are also potentially linked to contradictory ethics. Second, I argue that "practicing" scholarly responsibility is aided by an affective component - a capacity for moral outrage in relation to one's field and objects of inquiry. This affective component is more easily embraced by critical scholars, as it stands in tension with positivist conceptions of science. Third, I claim that beyond recognition of the value of moral judgment guided by emotion the construction of standards for responsible scholarship in IR also requires some common ground in deontological ethics. In the third part of the paper I offer some starting points for the development of such moral common ground. Ultimately, the recommendation presented here for how to construct agreement about scholarly responsibility in IR combines a belief in the value of communal standards of inquiry, an element of consequentialist ethics supported by moral sentiment, and the conviction that morality requires a reasoned foundation in deontological ethics. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper begins with the argument that at a basic level ?theory? and ?practice? are inseparable, yet differing, ideal-type expressions of knowledge. While theory is intrinsically practical because words and reasons are actions and causes, practice is inherently theoretical because actions and causes are forms of theory, too. When we distinguish between theory and practice, therefore, this is not on the grounds of their ontological or epistemological status, but our instrumental interests: theory and practice serve differing purposes, and we value their usefulness accordingly. Thus, while theory is clearly ?relevant? for practice and vice versa, another question becomes more important: Is theory also ?responsible? for practice? For example, is Marxist (or Liberal) theory responsible for Marxist (or Liberal) practice? This paper argues that the (moral) responsibility of theory for practice is much more bounded than theory?s relevance for practice (and vice versa). Crucially, the paper suggests that while theory and theorist ?are? morally responsible for practice, we nonetheless should not necessarily ?hold? them morally responsible as well. In short, while there might not be a great divide between theory and practice in ontological or epistemological terms, this paper aims to defend the view that there is indeed a moral difference between theory and practice; and that the moral standing of theory for the sake of theory is worth defending. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Words such as ?governance,? ?community? and ?empire,? are frequently used to describe the contemporary international society. This paper explores the political and philosophical thinking underlying these images and proposes that while these images reflect significant trends in the current international order, the unique structure of the international society should not be overlooked. The first section of the paper seeks to identify common features of each of the three images: global governance, global community, and the imperial world order. It will be explored which aspects of the current international order are illuminated and omitted by each of the images.The second section explores the political and philosophical background of the domestic images of the international society. Starting by examining the background of the ?political/ ethical turn? in international relations theory, it will investigate in turn the liberal view, the ?solidarist?/ cosmopolitan view, and the radical/ post-structural view, underlying respectively the images of global governance, global community, and the imperial world order. It will be summarised that while the first two images emphasise the integration of the formerly divided international society, the third tends to shift the focus away from the formal structure of the Westphalian system. The third section of the paper seeks to point out the unique structure of the international society that cannot be overlooked when we discuss politics and ethics at the global level. While the Westphalian system is being undermined in some respects, it is stubbornly defended in other respects. Although there have been many social, economic, and cultural developments that cannot be captured by just looking at the formal Westphalian structure, it cannot be overlooked that these changes take place under the structural restraint of the international society. The paper will examine the unique characteristics of law, politics, and ethics in the international society. In concluding, the paper proposes that while the domestic images of the international society well illustrate some important trends in current international order, the formal structure unique to the international society should be kept in mind. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If framing ethical duties of corporations beyond those established by law is difficult in peaceful situations, it becomes even more complex in zones of conflict. However, it is precisely in such situations that the most acute ethical issues arise. This paper first frames the ethical problematic for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in general terms, and then specifically in zones of conflict. The paper analyzes CSR in relation to the international legal personality of corporations and their legal duties to shareholders and stakeholders under domestic law and the hole this leaves in international law. It also examines corporate governance by considering the sorts of goods they supply and the problems of trying to establish broader ethical duties to international society. The paper then analyzes zones of conflict in relation to the publicness/privateness of corporate "security" responsibilities. The analytical and theoretical problems involved in framing security duties for corporations that extend beyond the remit of their employees or stakeholders (when they find themselves involved in civil conflict) is considered. Finally, the paper provides some examples that illustrate the need for ethical regulation, most likely from oil and gas and minerals corporations in zones of conflict. The conclusion reflects on the pressing need for improving corporate global governance ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of accountability have approached the subject in principal-agent terms touting accountability as a mechanism for controlling agents who deviate from their mandate. Rarely do scholars examine accountability as a politically charged and socially constructed concept, one that changes over time. This paper seeks to examine the concept of accountability in the humanitarian and development sector, focusing on efforts by international non-governmental organizations to self-regulate. Specifically the paper will investigate six cases: HAP-I, Project Sphere, Projet Qualité, Synergie Qualité, Actionaid?s Alps and the Draft Code of Ethics and Conduct for African Civil Society Organizations. This paper will focus on structural factors that have shaped the discourse about accountability in the humanitarian and development sector, these factors include: levels and types of aid, numbers or growth of INGOs, crises of legitimacy in the international non-governmental sector (INGO) sector, and divisions between the north and south. The expectation is that variations in context will help explain variations in how accountability is conceptualized in the humanitarian and development sector either as upwards accountability to donors or states, downwards to beneficiaries, internal to members or horizontal to other INGOs. In addition, variations in context will determine whether accountability is defined in qualitative, quantitative or strategic terms. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers whether a coherent ethical project is emerging in the dominant neo-liberal historical bloc within the United States. Understanding ethical stances that make up a historical bloc is critical. Referring back to Gramsci (1999: 325-334), consent is both constituted and re-constituted through the enveloping acceptance and subsequent sedimentation of an assortment of values, world-views and morals that are supportive of established power relations. In the current historical juncture within the United States, I posit that ethical claims are being forged through three leading social forces: religious/moral, nationalist/patriotic, and capitalist. While these forces currently form a unified historic bloc, recent developments place this ongoing cohesiveness in question. In this paper, I seek to examine the ethical claims raised by these three social forces and map out their similarities and incongruities. Christian-Right: The rise of the Christian-Right, especially that of the Evangelical Right, is a critical force in the construction of American politics as this constellation of groups provides a critical mass of voters to support the neo-liberal project. More importantly, the Christian-Right has developed an ethical positioning that provides a coherent worldview for supporters and policies. Examples of the former include voter information packages that identify a vote-seeking candidate?s position on key issues and Internet resources (e.g. email alerts) that identify important upcoming Congressional votes and the leanings of individual elected officials. In terms of the latter, organizations such as Dr. James Dobson?s Focus on the Family and the National Evangelical Association (NEA) provide policy prescriptions on issues pertaining to ?family values?. The NEA, which represents over 47,000 congregations, has also held weekly meetings with both the Clinton and Bush administrations. Nationalist/Patriotic: The national trauma of the 11 September 2001 attacks, the perceived isolation of the United States within the global system and the movement of migrants, often undocumented, across the United States has activated a nationalist/patriot movement. The ethical position espoused is that of American exceptionalism and the sanctity of the American way of life along with national sovereignty. While not as organized as the Christian-Right, the nationalist/patriotic movement is increasing its presence as American economic, cultural and political power is reshaped in the current era. Like the Christian-Right however, the ethical positioning is not uniform with some nationalists supporting ?free trade?, for example, while others seek to have an America-first platform. Capitalist: These issues fold in with the third social force within the neo-liberal bloc, which posits the United States as a capitalist nation. The ethical position is that of ?freedom?, as market economies are increasingly thought to exist alongside free societies. While this vision is conventionally considered as one held by elites, the reactions to the attacks of 11 September reveal its pervasiveness throughout the population. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the agency enjoyed by the margins in appropriating and resisting discourses of the center. Empirically, it examines how the category of ?European values? is used in foreign policy rhetoric in Central Europe ? defined here as the East-Central European countries that acceded into the EU in 2004. The link between ?European values? and EU enlargement is usually studied in terms of accession countries following western prescriptions in learning or adopting these values in spheres such as their relations with Russia. This paper examines how Central European states use that same category of ?European values? to justify policies that are not necessarily in line with western prescriptions. In theoretical terms, this highlights how the category of ?European values? is constructed not only in the power centers but also on the power margins of Europe. It illuminates the flexibility of broad normative concepts like ?European values?, as well as the capacity of the margins to use that flexibility to their advantage. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Instead of focusing on the elusive essence of decision, this paper looks at the ethics of decision. It looks at the two dominant representation of the ethics of Britain's decision to invade Iraq: the pro- and anti-war lobby. Rather than seeking to synthesise the two, or produce a better representation, this paper argues that both conspire to efface the profoundly political nature of the ethics of decision. Both representations are shown to deconstruct, due to the paradoxes and contradictions of 'ethics' and decision', undermining themselves as they make their case. The aim of emphasising the political nature of ethical decision is to show that while the danger in the US may be the silencing of anti-war opinion, the opposite is the case in Britain. It is argued that this could have potentially dangerous implications, while the silencing of debate and ethico-political discussion can never be anything but bad for critical thinking. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will examine the relationship between morality, nationalism and state loyalty. Using contemporary Israel as a case study, the paper will explore the current right-wing Israeli opposition to Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza disengagement plan, questioning the process by which overall state identity is mediated through splinter ideologies, and the results of those competing nationalist visions for defining loyalty to carrying out state policies. Specifically, the paper will ask whether refusal to obey state-issued orders based on a particularist view of the national interest is, in any way, less moral than the traditional forms of conscientious objection exhibited in the context of opposing "unjust" wars. The issues also touch on the question of the relationship between individual and communal forms of ethics and morality in the context of the concept of the national interest. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A substantial body of literature has emerged lately around the topic of retrospective justice, asking how societies have and can deal with atrocities and injustices in their past. While these efforts attempt to redress the past they have also featured aspirations about the future—to change conditions such that injustices are not repeated. Rare in these aspirations about the future, however, is discussion of reflexivity or moral learning. Surprisingly little effort has been made to articulate how moral reflexivity can be developed among individuals, organizations, and communities so that individuals in similar situations might have the moral resources to make better choices in the future. I begin such an endeavor by showing how institutions can be better prepared to meet their moral responsibilities when its members have developed moral reflexivity. An important aspect of institutional moral responsibility is redressing the failure to act by ensuring that institutions act responsibly in the future in a way commensurate with their status as moral agents. I argue that such an effort requires looking inside the organization to how individuals are embedded and act from within the organization. These individuals may be thwarted in their moral decision-making by organizational socialization and dysfunctions. Thus, a crucial aspect of reform is imbuing individuals with the moral capabilities to successfully confront these impediments. In this paper I describe the concept of ‘moral reflexivity by, in part, drawing on the work of Foucault, Giddens and Bourdieu. I explain how institutions can be thwarted from acting responsibly and explain how moral reflexivity might enable individuals embedded in organizations to successfully confront these organizational deficiencies. I then examine a case that is widely perceived as an organizational moral failure and, as a result, prompted reevaluation and generation of lessons learned—the lack of intervention by the United Nations (UN) to stop the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. I ask whether the subsequent ‘lessons learned’ by the organization recognized the lack of moral reflexivity. Next, I address the challenge of teaching moral reflexivity, asking how it might be effectively imparted on individuals and institutionalized in organizations. Finally, I conclude the paper with a discussion of the possible limits of ‘moral reflexivity’. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on enduring North/South issues of inequality in the Information Age and explores the ethics of access, including in relation to issues of gender. It foregrounds diverse roles of feminist theory and practice in aiding critical thinking about technology, including the importance of historically grounded perspectives on it. It examines the extreme material and other associated inequalities of contemporary globalization, and the concentration of technological development and power in the rich economies of the North. It emphasizes, in this respect, the enduring importance of North/South frameworks of analysis. Historical developments discussed include the gendered nature of technologies and social processes shaping their production, application and use. The paper asks questions about the ideological tensions between enduring neoliberal discourses of equality and long-term trends of inequality. It examines long standing feminist contributions to exposing and addressing these tensions. The paper also considers feminist and women's activism and community building across North/South, South/North and South/South, and their implications for the study of International Relations. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increased emphasis on the issue of ethics in contemporary political debates has produced forms of thinking about the inter-national in terms of connections to 'Otherness.' Lacanian psychoanalysis is increasingly referenced as a way to help produce an 'ethics of responsibility' in a nonstructuralist frame that addresses the relationship between the 'subject' and the 'Other.' By working through Lacan's two most explicit engagements with ethics, namely the ethical obligations of psychoanalysis and his discussion of Kantian ethics through Sadian philosophy, this paper will argue that the situated character of Lacanian ethics resists the universalist appropriations of his thought. Instead, his work encourages us to examine contemporary methodologies of studying sites of the inter-national in forms that place the practices of academic study. Rather than focus on an abstract form of ethical responsibility, this paper argues for a greater emphasis on the ethnographic character of contemporary political research that can produce an engaged and potentially politicized ethics. More specifically, I argue that the 'anti-social' character of contemporary anti-capitalist protest can also be a site of sustained ethical activity, both between 'subjects' and towards anti-capitalist ends. While this form of situated ethics bears a Lacanian signature, it also foregrounds the problems of appropriating psychoanalysis for these ends, discouraging the abstract formalization of a universal ethics. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Boaz Ganor, Director of the International Policy Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT), defined ?suicidal terrorism? as ?the operational method in which the very attack is dependent upon the death of the perpetrator?. Further, Ganor states that suicidal terrorism aims at ?striking a blow to public moral?. Suicide bombers are readily available, require little training, leave no trace behind, and strike fear into the general population. The end of the twentieth century saw a frightening increase in the horror of suicide bombers?the emergence of females as weapons. Historically, the use of human beings as incendiary devices predates the tragic events of September 11, 2001 by at least twenty years. Lebanon?s own Hizballah and their use of suicide bombers in the 1980s sparked a new era for terrorists everywhere. Since its ?formal? introduction, suicide bombing has gone from social anomaly to political normative. The success of suicide bombers depends upon an element of surprise, as well as accessibility to targeted areas and/or populations. Customarily, suicide bombers were young males, typically 18 to 22 years old, overtly religious, not particularly well educated, and members of the lower socioeconomic strata; conversely the recent gesticulation of female suicide bombers has been a cultural revolution both domestically and internationally. However, the twenty-first century has been characterized by an increase in suicide bombings perpetrated by women. Feminine participation in the most extreme forms of terrorism occurs for various reasons and quite distinct differences. This fairly recent phenomenon poses two very conflicting and confusing elements. Some scholars argue that the rising number of female suicide bombers is a sign of the rising status of women in Middle Eastern cultural identity, a dramatic shift in the area?s traditional patriarchal societal image, which is perhaps due to the inevitable influence of Western societal values and culture. Others argue the reverse?that the desire to become a martyr stems from the marginalization of women in Middle Eastern societies.Clearly, female suicide bombers are the most extreme form of female exploitations. These women become objectified; even if they think their choice was subjective. By either accepting or volunteering for their suicide mission, females become objects; consequently they become weapons in the hands of male led terrorist organizations. The following paper presents a historical analysis of female suicide bombers. This paper seeks to analyze the factors leading women to become part of this tactic utilized by various terrorist organizations, and provides implications of this change to use women within a strategic assessment of future female suicide bombings. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid development of the life sciences presents us with some of the most difficult ethical challenges of our time and the field of bioethics has grown swiftly in response. The complex politics of bioethics and its relationship to universalist moral claims, in combination with the international mobility of life science research, has created pressure for global regulation: both to develop global bioethical norms and to regulate research in the life sciences at the global level. In this paper, I examine attempts to institutionalise bioethics at the international level, dissecting the structure of the ethical arguments and uncovering the politics with which they are entwined.The analysis focuses on the recent UN debate on cloning and the attempt to broaden a widely supported ban on reproductive cloning to include somatic cell nuclear transfer, so-called ?therapeutic cloning?, an important research tool in the controversial field of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) science. The paper analyses the structure of the debate, untangling the complex relationship between the self-consciously cosmopolitan agenda of human rights discourse and the culturally specific underpinnings of influential positions within the debate. The paper also examines the politics behind the ethical rhetoric, evaluating the extent to which the debate was shaped by (soft) power politics and driven by economic interest, a desire to pre-empt competition between national regulatory regimes in a potentially lucrative field. In light of these analyses, both ethical and political, the paper evaluates the role of the UN as an institutional setting, asking to what extent it is able to offer an appropriate forum for bioethical deliberation. In terms of the broader theme of international norm-building, the paper highlights the danger that attempts to institutionalise and/or regulate ethics at the global level may be subject to distortion or capture by economic interests. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International criminal tribunals are intended to uphold international ethics, designed to punish violations of the most severe crimes in international law. These are the crimes that violate jus cogens norms, peremptory norms in the international system because they are understood to be fundamental. Explicitly tasked to uphold fundamental international norms, it is important that the ethics of these institutions are themselves subject to scrutiny. This paper examines the institution of international criminal tribunals through a close analysis of the practice at the ICTR, and the statute of the ICC. This demonstrates that the guiding norms of their operation are procedural rather than substantive. Staff may be removed for reasons of professional misconduct, such as the corruption in the Registrar's office of the ICTR in its early years. However, the emphasis is upon such formal professional or procedural norms; we might choose to assess the ethics of these tribunals in a less formalistic fashion. In this paper I consider whether the tribunals are measuring up, or can measure up, to their own goals and normative justifications, and whether legal actors and institutions are necessarily the preferred guardians of morality. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

?Environmental Ethics and the North-South Divide: A Case Study of Long-Term Nuclear Waste Storage?A paper proposal for the 2006 meeting of the ISA Henry B. LyonGraduate StudentUniversity of KentuckyPolitical Science DepartmentThis paper continues my current research interests in the politics of nuclear waste. It builds on papers previously presented at ISA and ISA South.The thirty countries that employ nuclear power generation have built sizable inventories of radioactive waste. Nuclear waste resulting from the generation of electricity is held in temporary storage on site at these facilities. The problem of establishing and managing a long-term storage facility to hold this hazardous material seems intractable. No place on Earth, it seems, wants to be known as the planets nuclear waste dump. Well, almost no place on Earth. Russia has proposed to build a nuclear repository in Siberia for the international community, for a fee. And in the United States, a Native-American Nation in northern Utah has offered to relieve Nevada of the responsibility for Yucca Mountain, again for a fee. Will it be long before a truly global South state decides to outbid Russia for an international repository? This seemingly miraculous solution to the intractable problem of dealing, long-term with nuclear waste, is in fact too good to be true. The ethical questions this proposed solution raises mirror much of the history of North South relations. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do women reclaim their subjectivity, power and freedom in the postcolonial phallogocentric social symbolic? What are the politics of admittance that confronts the postcolonial woman whose subject position has often been ventriloquised and inscribed from the position of the Other? Moreover, can the ‘recovery’ of a subject-position also move beyond the essentialising claims of racial, ethnic and gender strictures? More importantly, is ‘Woman’ a proper name? Is there a proper, essential Truth and identity to ‘Woman’? In short, these are some of the challenges that the figure of the subaltern woman raises: the challenge that we dispose ourselves to a feminism of ethics that is an affirmative ethical position toward the wholly other who maintains an absolute singularity (tout autre est tout autre), the challenge of a radical alterity and an undecidability that demands, insists that we move beyond the boundedness of racial, ethnic and gender enclosures. These are some of the themes raised in my paper ? a continuation of an on-going research project that also attempts to evaluate the above questions in relation to the representational spaces of postcolonial diasporic aesthetics, spaces that moreover exemplify the art of the political that operates in the space of the ‘perhaps’, spaces that foreground the possibilisation of the impossible. Further, the paper also suggests that this possibilisation lies in the possibility of moving beyond the identification of the female element as opposition, a movement that I suggest is inherently political and ethical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When surveying the cosmopolitan literature one is often struck by the ease at which the state is rendered morally and empirically otiose and by resulting ambiguities about the role states could play in creating a cosmopolitan condition. In response to these ambiguities, the purpose of this article is to examine some recent cosmopolitan arguments and to see what answers, if any, they have for bridging the gap between cosmopolitan theory and state practice. By doing so, this article will map out the recent relationship between cosmopolitanism and the state while also suggesting that cosmopolitans should reconsider a research agenda based on the idea of responsible cosmopolitan states as a means to create stronger links between cosmopolitan theory and contemporary international practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite attempts to acquire and threats to use weapons of mass destruction (WMD), there has not been a massive attack using the weapons by al Qa'eda or any other radical Islamic group. An explanation for this is found through analysis of the public "ethical" discourse occurring among leaders of al Qa'eda and other members of radical Islam regarding WMD through a strategic culture framework. This discourse reveals a strategic culture within radical Islam that focuses on discourse as tool for the persuasion of populace for varying acts of jihad. This analysis is intended to advance scholarly research on WMD terrorism; to enable more sophisticated risk and threat assessments on the pursuit of WMD by radical Islamist terrorist groups like al Qa'eda, which will enable more effective counterterrorism policy; and to offer specific policy recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The legacy of the United Nation's secretary-general Dag Hammarskjöld can be seen as the search for a political philosophy of the world organisation UN. The practical mystical Hammarskjöld, whose spiritual set of beliefs influenced his political activity, was always searching for universality and solidarity, just as it is written down in the charter of the UN. Like no one before him, Hammarskjöld was able to unite personal belief and political ratio in his office. This is the main reason why he became a respected and true international civil servant. Hammarskjöld was neither a pure idealist nor a pure realist. For Hammarskjöld, mystical belief always was characterized by practical political engagement. Due to his unconditional engagement in political crises during the Cold War he caused rejections in the East and in the West. The article examines the moral but not moralistic life and legacy of Hammarskjöld who united mystics and realistic political engagement. In doing so it draws on the "lessons learned" from a "practical mystical" and international civil servant. This is chiefly done in using the English School approach of international relations theory-which always had a great emphasis upon diplomacy-while at same time pointing out the impact of positive mimesis. Only in devoting his private life to God, Hammarskjöld was able to devote his official and political life to the UN. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When one offers an explanation of why things happen as they do in international relations one is never simply describing a causal mechanism as one might do in Newtonian physics. One is always offering an account of the why's and wherefors of international ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers how the particular form of subjectivity produced within liberalism still exerts considerable influence over postmodern critical endeavors. This is particularly evident when one considers Ashley and Walker's description of the 'dissident exile' and places it alongside Mill's conceptualization of the 'genius'. The two appear as virtual mirror images of one another. Admittedly, postmodern iterations of subjectivity place a great deal of emphasis on alterity and ethical engagement which postmodernists insist moves beyond the ethical limitations which characterize liberalism's stress on the atomized, sovereign individual. But even given this shift to an ethics of engagement, postmodern subjectivity still fundamentally relies upon a highly individualized subject who can independently choose to shift their own ethical parameters to include an expansive and relational solidarity with 'the other'. The terms of the ethical engagement may have been reformulated, but the individual at its center still bears the trace of its modern liberal subjectivity. However, drawing upon the idea of performitivity enables a reconceptualization of self-making which opens up new agonistic possibilities to transgress these liberal limitations. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term "humanitarianism" refers to the sentiment which drives practitioners who are in the business of trying to lesson the impact of some of the most brutal forms of suffering in international society.Humanitarians are therefore frequently "lumped" t ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many streams of contemporary moral discourse are chary about speaking of categorical obligation or of making universalizing moral claims. Not all, of course: those still under the spell of Kantian ethics cannot help but immerse themselves in the language ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay then, we seek to bring to the forefront a concept of the event in Arendt's writings. The purpose of which is not only to demonstrate its importance for her own thought but to show that this concept has for too long been neglected in international relations and ethics. The first part of this essay briefly looks at the current ways international relations theory discusses history and the event as such. In the second part of the essay, we discuss what the concept of history signifies for Arendt's thinking based on her own essays present in the volume Between Past and Future. The third part of the essay deals with Arendt's own writings on the concept of revolution qua event. What Arendt's writing on revolutions in part reveals is an important understanding of the temporality that factors into the event as revolution. There is thus a marked difference for her between the American Revolution and French Revolution, which the latter cannot be seen simply as a repetition of the former, because it operates on a totally different conceptualization of time. Rather than reducing temporality to either a liberal idea of progress or to the realist understanding of cyclicality, Arendt's notion of temporality is fundamentally tied to an ethical imperative. This is what makes Arendt's thought interesting for scholars of international relations. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past ten years, humanitarian intervention has been justified in British foreign policy discourse as a matter of saving people and preventing suffering. The archetypal example of this was the Kosovo intervention of 1999. Equally, in most international relations literature on the topic, both from cosmopolitans and the English School (e.g. Richard Falk and Nicholas Wheeler) the human is at the heart of ethical justifications for war. Yet, in both cases, it is a specific and limited conception of the 'human' that is treated with such care: a human that must be protected on their own soil, but not transferred to a different territory. Perhaps the most obvious ethical solution (cheaper, easier and less violent) to the Kosovo conflict, if protecting the human was key, would have been to airlift refugees into NATO countries. However, such a policy of hospitality was explicitly rejected in British foreign policy - in fact the British government was generally hostile to more refugees. Similarly, humanitarian intervention literature barely touched upon it, despite the importance of cosmopolitan 'hospitality'. Given this, it cannot be a concept of the human stripped of all its political content (what Agamben would call 'bare life') that is key to the ethics of war. Rather, it is a 'human' that must be kept distant, tied to a territorial identity, and separated from the subject that does the saving. It is argued that interveners and cosmopolitans alike need to differentiate their conception of the human, especially in its relation to a territorial 'home'. A more complex conception of the 'human' would be much more difficult to place simplistically at the centre of an ethics of war. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his original article on market civilization, Gill argues that a key aspect of the process of neoliberal governance is its emphasis on self-actualization through the process of consumption. Discourses of neoliberalism suggest that the self is actualized ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human rights have both a legal and a social dimension, connected to their grounding in both law and morality. They are used in legal regulatory systems and in social movements, but in very different and sometimes incompatible ways. Through a comparativ ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the 20th century some versions of just war doctrine came to restrict the condition of just cause to defense, that is, these just war doctrines now hold it to be a necessary condition for the moral justifiability of any war that it be undertaken fo ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discourses of global ethics tend to ground responsibilities in two significantly different ethical impulses. Bystander duties stem from the ability to alleviate a harm. Consequential duties are those which stem from having contributed to causing a harm. D ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amongst Americans, it has often been argued that, because it does not formally extend its territory, the US does not exhibit the same injustices and dysfunctionality as the old (notably European colonial) empires. William Appleman Williams' critique of America's imperialism as 'a way of life' is a highly influential counterclaim. According to him, imperialism is a posture with regard to others, and that posture is built into the American political order regardless of sovereign territorial expansion in the eyes of the international order of states. On this account, America's 'imperialism' pre-dates the appearance of the US on the international global stage in the 20th century. It is, however, the New World expression of conceptions of power, good order and the legitimacy of institutionalized force originating in thoroughly European values, notably those of the Enlightenment. 'J'accuse, je m'accuse.', one might then respond to Europeans inclined to tut-tut at US actions in the world. European and American ways of thinking have been equally 'imperialist' in a pejorative sense, even though it is the USA that, since the middle of the 20th century, has put such thinking into practice. Williams' prima facie appealing argument against American imperialism raises two kinds of issues for Europeans: *As regards the analysis of empires, it suggests that the difference between the 20th-century occurrence of imperialism centred on the Western side of the Atlantic and its disappearance on the European side should be explained by the circumstances that obtained in the two locations. For their power practices have been fundamentally the same. Empires have arisen where Western-type centres of rule have met weak opposition from those over whom they were in a position to extend their power.*As regards avoiding the potential evils of imperialism, Williams' argument suggests that we must pay closer attention to the make-up and the manner of power, rather than its formal territorial extent. That implication should give gung-ho Europeans pause for thought. If imperialism lies deep within the Western soul, then Europe should beware that its own does not sneak back into effect - for example, in the form of the EU's purportedly benign suzerainty over the western end of the Eurasian continent.I conclude that, if they are to put themselves forward as critics of the US Empire, Europeans must operate with a highly tuned sense of their own identity and its relation to that of America and American imperialism. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

“Windows of opportunity” has been a core concept in the security studies literature for a long time. It generally refers to a period during which a state has significant advantage over a rival. In turn, this advantage is thought to encourage aggressive behavior by states looking to subdue their adversary. Despite its prominence in scholarly and policy writings, few studies have actually tested the “windows” argument in a systematic way. Rather, it is treated as an article of faith among many analysts that shifts in military capabilities generate windows and these windows trigger aggressive behavior. Military factors, however, are only oneâ€"and perhaps not even the most importantâ€"component of a window of opportunity. Recent work on the role of third-parties in international disputes suggests that diplomatic considerations play an important role in decisions of war. A state would be reluctant to risk war against a rival if doing so might prompt the intervention of third-parties who could influence the war’s outcome. Conversely, leaders who anticipate outside support or indifference are more likely to take such risks. Shifts in diplomatic relations, then, may also open and close windows of opportunity. Absent from the literature is any effort to disaggregate and compare these different types of windowsâ€"military and diplomatic. Yet, this distinction is an important one. It points in two different and often opposing directions for understanding and predicting aggression. I attempt to fill this gap. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People can be friends with other people, and friendships between people carry moral significance; our obligations to our friends are different from our obligations to people generally. We often speak as though friendships can also exist between countries, and as though such friendships, too, carry moral significance. I argue that this way of speaking is mistaken. The special obligations of friendship, I argue, stem from relationships of mutual loyalty. Genuine loyalty requires some mental sophistication; to be loyal to something you must recognize it, care about it for its own sake, and have certain sorts of feelings and emotions. It is possible to ascribe some mental states to a country â€" perhaps a country can have intentions, plans and concerns â€" but it is dreadfully implausible, I argue, to ascribe to a country the kind of mental life that it would require in order to be genuinely loyal. It follows that countries cannot be friends â€" or not in any sense that makes a difference to what countries and their political representatives should do. I close by linking this argument to the general questions of what kinds of moral relationships can exist between individuals and the state, and of how we ought to think about states in our own moral deliberation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emmanuel Levinas is variously used to provide a conceptualisation of ethics from which to deduce an ethical politics, an account of the movement from ethics to politics or an exhortation to continually interrupt politics in the name of ethics. What all these approaches share is a reading of Levinas where ethics and politics are separated and ethics is prioritised. My argument in this article is that if the concept of the Third is given due weight in Levinas's work then this separation and prioritisation is untenable. The reading advanced foregrounds the Third and in doing so demonstrates that the unproblematised 'ethics' often drawn from Levinas is more complex than might initially appear. I argue that if the Third is taken seriously then Levinas's work leads to a requirement to think in terms of the ethico-political, so complicating any attempt to deduce politics from ethics which draws on this. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A concept of Global Care provides an ideal of international justice morally superior to liberal ones. First, it is empathetic, not only rationally, but also affectively and culturally. Second, it is anthropologically sounder. Care focuses on webs of human interrelationships in which dependent and interdependent agents find themselves concretely and where each has the possibility and the duty of caring for the needs of some others. The concept of Global Care presented here builds on work in feminist ethics and on Küng's 'Global Ethic' which identifies two principles advocated by all major religions: (1) treating everyone humanely; this principle goes beyond the liberal right to be treated equally, to the injunction of treating others humanely, ie. with care; and (2) the 'Golden Rule' which implies a universality of humankind whereby every human can empathize with any other because all share the same fundamental needs. Individuals, groups, transnational institutions (IOs and NGOs) who are helping others in concrete instances in many different areas, are often examples of care at the international level. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the legality of the actions of the U.S. government in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorists attacks in relation to new conceptions of law and ethics. It states that after the attack, the government also attacked the conspirators of the bombers in Afghanistan, alleged that some of the conspirators committed war crimes and held them in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It discusses the establishment of military commissions by the U.S. following the conflict in Afghanistan.

The article analyzes the pervasiveness of the global ethics as it manifests in faith-based organizations. It states that the strategic method of promoting the vision of the global ethics movement could be done through interfaith dialogue. It cites the global missions of the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA). It states that the organizations are likely to support the morality of their parent denomination.

The article discusses the ethics of population displacement by development. It argues that development has impoverished people and displaced them on a massive scale. It explains that foreign participants in the development process have a moral obligation to minimize harm and rehabilitate people who were affected by the displacement even if the laws of the host country do not demand for that. It explains the orientations in ethics that should be considered in displacement.

International ethics, law and politics arise within a conceptual framework of civilization/barbarism and peacetime/wartime. This framework incorporates a myth of unitary, unproblematic masculinity -- 'warrior man'/'economic man' -- whose world is not in fact bifurcated by a war/peace distinction, but is rather one world of competitive, aggressive, self-interested and somewhat paranoid strategic interaction. While this masculinized being has an obvious relation to sex, gender and sexuality, it is curiously prior to the gender binary. Indeed a projection from 'within' this masculinized being (of woman as an 'other') is the foundation of the gender binary as such. As the foundational 'man' in the human, the humane and the humanitarian, this figure is also the source of the animal, machine and divinity projections through which 'man's' characteristics are given metaphorical reality in language. This occurs both as 'outward' projections through which 'othering' takes place (from which real 'others' are then identified in graded categories) and as recursive re-projections through which the myth of the unified masculine being is itself animated. The 'man' in the human, the humane and the humanitarian is the locus through which power-flows negate the moral categories (in declarations and conventions of rights and protections) that -- far from being genuinely respected -- are themselves subverted by the destructive peace/war and civilization/barbarism dichotomization of human experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article initiates an inquiry into the role models play in the context of postmodern international relations. The opening for such an inquiry takes its direction from Campbell's (1993: 87) request for "a mode of representation...an account of ethics and responsibility that can inform contemporary international political practice but that is no longer dependent upon the unsustainable notion of autonomous agency." The debate is framed via the theoretical trajectories staked out between Judith Butler and Seyla Benhabib over their conflicting views on feminism's need for a model and Weber's delineation between ideal types and ideal models. The discussion is further developed through an examination of Linda Zerilli's analysis of what she claims to be misfocused debates over the exclusionary character of the category 'women.' The debate is then extended along the lines of John Seery's query regarding the self that is constructed out of postmodern models of political interaction. After tracing out the fault lines of these theoretical debates I thought it would be instructive to juxtapose the following types: Haraway's cyborg, Ashley's IC and Ashley and Walker's dissident exile in order to examine how these types function within the terms of a postmodern theoretical trajectory of thought. Specifically, I am interested in tracing the ethical content that underwrites these types. This is extremely significant because if postmodern theorists can be shown to rely upon and posit types, and if it is possible to trace the ethical commitments that underlie these types, then this will provide the opening for us to not only discuss the ethical commitments in postmodern IR scholarship, but more importantly, to consider if the positing of such models or types indicates foundational commitments that may in effect serve to ground a postmodern emancipatory politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a roundtable on international institutions as moral agents at the "International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention" in Honolulu, Hawaii. It focuses on the moral agents in international relations, coalitions of the willing and great powers, and punishment and moral rehabilitation to delinquent institutions which have failed in their moral duties.

The article focuses on some issues of comparison and criticism on ethical foreign policies. The author emphasizes that examination of the politics of memory which is at work where the domestic and the foreign meet and intersect should be done to understand the moral basis of foreign policy. It mentions that engagement of humanitarian intervention in non-war settings destroyed by natural disasters is a way of adding an ethical dimension to foreign policy.

The article focuses on ethical intervention in western politics. It is said that the lack of concentration of the war on terror emphasizes the problems of articulating a national interest in international or domestic politics. It is suggested that neither traditional realism nor idealist constructivism can fully apprehend the emergence of moral and ethical concerns today due to the explanation for this shift away from the articulation of national interests cannot be located in the international sphere.

As part of an overall focus on governance in international political economy, the corruption issue has catapulted from the margins of academic and policy discourse on international affairs to a position as one of the central problems facing transition economies and the developing world today. But the irreducibly normative character of anti-corruption discourse is in tension with the predominantly rationalist, technical and instrumental justifications for open markets which have come to dominate the academic and institutional discourse on international political economy. The omissions and oversights of neo-liberal discourse lead analysts to evade and obscure, rather than directly engage, core problems of politics and ethics; this may have practical consequences for anti-corruption efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]