Justification of Force in the Trans-Atlantic Debate: Towards a Moderate Institutionalist Cosmopolitanism
Starting from the trans-Atlantic divide on the issue of justification of force which became obvious after 9/11, it is argued that the differences between the Anglo-American and Continental-European standard arguments can be overcome by a moderate institutionalist cosmopolitanism. It combines a moder...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publicado: |
2007
|
| En: |
Studies in Christian ethics
Año: 2007, Volumen: 20, Número: 1, Páginas: 102-117 |
| Otras palabras clave: | B
Internationalism
B International Law B Cosmopolitanism B Human Rights B Peace B institutionalism B Just War B international justice |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | No electrónico
|
| Sumario: | Starting from the trans-Atlantic divide on the issue of justification of force which became obvious after 9/11, it is argued that the differences between the Anglo-American and Continental-European standard arguments can be overcome by a moderate institutionalist cosmopolitanism. It combines a moderate institutionalist approach with a comprehensive concept of human rights and a moderate cosmopolitan stand on the issue of international distributive justice. If all three aspects are taken into account adequately in an ethical theory of international relations, both the Anglo-American traditions of just war theory and a radical Kantian legalism must be revised and common ground could be revealed. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0953-9468 |
| Obras secundarias: | Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0953946806075494 |
