<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>international law &#8211; Kapok Tree Diplomacy</title>
	<atom:link href="https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/tag/international-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress</link>
	<description>Exploring the conduct of international relations and the ideals of democracy &#38; individual liberty in the context of the Christian worldview.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Nov 2023 20:34:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.1</generator>
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">44605809</site>	<item>
		<title>Reflections on the Israel-Hamas Conflict in Gaza and Stray Voltage on Genocide, Proportionality, Apartheid, Collective Punishment, and the Impact of the (Demise of) the Right of Conquest  </title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/reflections-on-the-israel-hamas-conflict-in-gaza-and-stray-voltage-on-genocide-proportionality-apartheid-legality-of-settlements-and-the-demise-of-the-right-of-conquest/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/reflections-on-the-israel-hamas-conflict-in-gaza-and-stray-voltage-on-genocide-proportionality-apartheid-legality-of-settlements-and-the-demise-of-the-right-of-conquest/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2023 07:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prevent/Contain Intl. Conflicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apartheid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective punishment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gaza]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genocide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human shields]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israeli-Palestinian conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jewish settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mowing the grass]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occupation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open air prison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestinian Authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace treaty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Principle of proportionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right of Conquest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self determination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ten-dash line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[West Bank]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=909</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Disclaimer: The posts, views and opinions expressed on this site are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of my employer, the Department of Defense (DoD),]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/reflections-on-the-israel-hamas-conflict-in-gaza-and-stray-voltage-on-genocide-proportionality-apartheid-legality-of-settlements-and-the-demise-of-the-right-of-conquest/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">909</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Engaging the Dragon Through Peaceful Deterrence: Japan’s Need to Recalibrate Its Strategy of Accommodation with China</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[A2/AD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accommodation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[active defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[APEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arc of Freedom and Prosperity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Article 9]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASEAN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asia-Pacific]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balance of threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bandwagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Beijing Consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bilateral trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bretton Woods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charter of the United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coast guard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective self defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective struggle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communist Party of China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concert of democracies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Confucian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterbalancing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defensive realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diplomacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dispute settlement mechanisms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dynamic deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[East Asian Summit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic coercion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Direct Investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global commons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grand strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hypothesis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICJ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Court of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Monetary Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Japan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maritime incident]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maritime Self-Defense Forces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marxism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[means]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multilateral]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual benefit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual nonaggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual noninterference in internal affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mutual respect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[North Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[official development assistance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[one China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paracels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful coexistence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People’s Republic of China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power trajectory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[provocative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rebalance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reciprocal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistribution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right of self defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rising power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sansha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security dilemma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senkakus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shanghai Cooperation Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soft power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South China Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spratlys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun Tzu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taiwan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Three Non-Nuclear Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tibet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.-Japan Alliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Convention on the Law of the Sea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNCLOS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universal values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vietnam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ways]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wen Jiabao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Trade Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTO]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=408</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[For the past ten years China has gradually asserted itself in the South China Sea as it has re-risen to major power status within the tenets of the Beijing Consensus and the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.   Meanwhile, Japan waited until 2006 to launch its “Arc of Freedom and Prosperity” grand strategy for counterbalancing China and reasserting itself in the Asia Pacific.  There are profound differences between the two strategies in terms of the values they espouse as well as their ends, ways, means for achieving the national interests. 

Japan’s strategy towards China has been primarily one of accommodation and engagement, but China has taken advantage of Japan’s polite acquiescence to their power trajectory.  Territorial disputes over the Spratlys, Paracels and now the Senkakus, combined with China’s threats of economic coercion, threaten regional stability as Japan reaches out to like-minded Asia-Pacific states through defense, diplomacy and development alliances.  
 
Purpose Statement and Hypothesis

The purpose of the essay is to examine the key differences between Japan and China’s grand strategies, especially the values that guide their strategies and national interests, and the capabilities, resources and alliances required to execute the strategies, challenges for implementation, likelihood of success, and the implications for long-term peace and stability that depend on which strategy ultimately prevails.  The study aims to fill a gap in the literature that fails to fully analyze and compare the competing universal values espoused by each grand strategy and how these values could shape the emerging balance of power in the Asia-Pacific.

The central hypothesis is that in order to avoid Chinese domination of its regional sphere of influence, Japan must modify its strategy of accommodation and engagement to one of “peaceful deterrence” based upon an enhanced security posture that is values-based, multilateral in nature and regionally structured as a concert of democracies.  ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/engaging-the-dragon-through-peaceful-deterrence-japans-need-to-recalibrate-its-strategy-of-accommodation-with-china/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">408</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blind Man’s Bluff: Kazakhstan’s Mirage of Compliance with International Obligations to Uphold the Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Assembly and Association</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adil Soz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ar.Rukh.Khak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arrests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Astana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Azat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[censorship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Committee to Protect Journalists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copenhagen Document]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[derogated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dissent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ESC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedo House]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[good faith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Helsinki Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[honor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICCPR General Comment No. 34]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal assemblies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ILO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Labor Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international standards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakhstan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KIBHRRL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Mass Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Human Rights Action Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nazarayev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nur Otan party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obligations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[observer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODIHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pacta sunt servanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[participant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peaceful assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[permission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political pluralism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Nursultan Nazarbayev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ramazan Yesergepov]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reporters Without Borders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative on Freedom of the Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Respublika]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Siracusa Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spontaneous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[think tanks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UDHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Economic and Social Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN treaties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Periodic Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unregistered organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UPR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vienna Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yevgeniy Zhovtis]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=396</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Leveraging billions of dollars of oil, gas and mineral reserves while avoiding major inter-ethnic conflict, Kazakhstan has become the most powerful and prosperous of all Central Asian states under the savvy and astute leadership of President Nursultan Nazarbayev and the first to chair the prestigious 56-member Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2010 (Dave, 250). Despite Kazakhstan’s impressive political and economic trajectory, the state has failed to consistently recognize and secure many important civil and political rights for its citizens that are enshrined in international human rights treaties.  

The rights to the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association may be considered cornerstones of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the OSCE Copenhagen Document, and the OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly which help to guarantee and safeguard democracy, common societal interests, and the rule of law (Kz-OSCE 4). The two rights are complementary with a violation of one often violating the other. This essay seeks to answer the following question: To what extent do Kazakhstan’s excessive restrictions on the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association fail to meet its obligations undertaken in accordance with the ICCPR, the OSCE Copenhagen Document, and OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly? This essay will limit its coverage to the 2007 – 2011 timeframe. ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/blind-mans-bluff-kazakhstans-mirage-of-compliance-with-international-obligations-to-uphold-the-freedom-of-expression-and-freedom-of-assembly-and-association/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">396</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Were the rulings of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) more dependent upon customary or statutory international law?</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/were-the-rulings-of-the-international-military-tribunal-imt-more-dependent-upon-customary-or-statutory-international-law/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/were-the-rulings-of-the-international-military-tribunal-imt-more-dependent-upon-customary-or-statutory-international-law/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:53:18 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Free Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights & Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Allied Powers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aquinas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[binding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crime of aggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crimes against humanity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crimes Against Peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customary international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Geneva Conventions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hague Conventions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hugo Grotius]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Military Tribunal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus ad bellum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus cogens peremptory norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus in bello]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[just war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kellogg-Briand Pact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martens Clause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nulla poena sine lege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nullum crimen sine lege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obligation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinio juris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perpetrators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statutory international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Charter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verdict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Crimes]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=386</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Customary international law (IL) derives from a “combination of ‘state practice’ and opinio juris, the belief that a certain type of conduct under IL is an obligation (Byers 4).  According to Byers, new rules require “widespread support” before they become part of customary IL (4). Cerone adds that the Martens Clause of the Hague Conventions binds “belligerents to remain under the protection and the rule of the principles of the law of nations” until such time as custom becomes statutory in some form or fashion (qtd. in Mertus &#038; Helsing 219-220). Thus, custom serves as a “gap-filling” measure that universally binds all states and may apply to scenarios where IL has not yet been formalized into statutes (Mertus &#038; Helsing 220). ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/were-the-rulings-of-the-international-military-tribunal-imt-more-dependent-upon-customary-or-statutory-international-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">386</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Challenges Facing Outside Actors in Balancing Punitive and Reconciliatory Measures in Nation/State-Building and the Optimum Division of Labor to Overcome Them</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:43:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Conflict Reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acquis communautaire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[black market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosnia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosnian War Crimes Chamber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brain drain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[building capacity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capacity building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ceasefires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil society development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cold war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common national identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidence-building measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core pillars of societal reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dayton Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DD&R]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demobilizing combatants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[development projects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disarmament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disarming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[division of labor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic sanctions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethnic instability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU accession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EULEX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failed states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fragile states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gbagbo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Haiti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[host state consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humanitarian assistance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IDPs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impartiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internally displaced persons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kosovo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legitimacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loans and grants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mandate of neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military coup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[militias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minimum use of force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MNFs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MONUSCO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multinational forces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation/state-building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negotiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-governmental organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OECD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office of the High Representative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organized crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peacekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political will]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post conflict reconstruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power-sharing agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[punitive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reconciliation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reconciliatory measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional alliances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regional organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reparations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resettlement of refugees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rules of engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scarce resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[socioeconomic framework]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Somalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Timor-Leste]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traditional peacekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals partial amnesties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Assistance Mission to Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Operation in Somalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNAMIR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNOSOM II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victor’s justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war criminals]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=327</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[External actors such as international organizations (IOs), regional alliances (RAs), individual states, multinational forces (MNFs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have increasingly intervened in fragile and failed states in postconflict scenarios following the end of the Cold War. The nation/state-building processes (NSB) implemented by these actors to rebuild the “socioeconomic framework of society … [to include] the framework of governance and rule of law” (Hamre &#038; Sullivan 89) attempt to strike a reasonable balance between punitive and reconciliatory measures in their efforts to rehabilitate security, political, economic and social institutions as well as establish a sense of common identity among citizens (Bercovitch &#038; Jackson 175). 

This essay will analyze NSB processes around the core pillars of societal reform necessary to prevent a return to violence in context to the following points of emphasis:

(1)	 What types of challenges do the above-listed outside actors face in striking the balance between punitive and reconciliatory measures in NSB processes?

(2)	What division of labor among IOs, RAs, states and NGOs is likely to prove most effective in meeting such challenges in the future and why? 

The posts, views and opinions expressed on this site are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces. ]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/challenges-facing-outside-actors-in-balancing-punitive-and-reconciliatory-measures-in-nationstate-building-and-the-optimum-division-of-labor-to-overcome-them/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">327</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is International Law Genuine &#8216;Law&#8217;?</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/is-international-law-genuine-law/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/is-international-law-genuine-law/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2013 04:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Free Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American Law Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bolton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customary law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global citizens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legally binding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[positive law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rommen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sources and evidences]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treaties]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=316</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In answering this question, I must first appeal to the American Law Institute’s “Restatement of the Law, Third, Foreign Relations Law of the United States.” In Section 101 it defines international law as follows: “international law consists of rules and principles of general application dealing with the conduct of states and of international organizations and with their relations inter se, as well as with some of their relations with persons, whether natural or juridical.”]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/is-international-law-genuine-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">316</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Last Word on Justice: The Impact of the International Criminal Court On the Future of International Justice and its Rocky Road to Legitimacy</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-last-word-on-justice-the-impact-of-the-international-criminal-court-on-the-future-of-international-justice-and-its-rocky-road-to-legitimacy/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-last-word-on-justice-the-impact-of-the-international-criminal-court-on-the-future-of-international-justice-and-its-rocky-road-to-legitimacy/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:03:24 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[act of aggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automatic jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bilateral Article 98 agreeements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[checks and balances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crime of aggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David J. Scheffer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[delayed justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[delegated jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DROC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[due process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[erga omnes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICC jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICC Review Conference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impartiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Center for Transitional Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judicial Neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus ad bellum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus cogens norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kampala]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kenneth Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laws of war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Luis Moreno-Ocampo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonparty states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuremberg Tribunal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace vs. justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post hoc justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proprio motu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prosecuting the Crime of Aggression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reciprocity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rome Statute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-help]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tadic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hague]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Lubanga Dyilo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Security Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universal jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unwilling or unable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Versailles Treaty]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=244</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[“The world no longer has a choice between force and law. If civilization is to survive, it must choose the rule of law.” Dwight D. Eisenhower (qtd. in Ferencz 288)

Introduction

The remarkable ascent of international criminal law over the past two decades has had, and continues to have, a profound impact on the laws of war, humanitarian and human rights laws, and existing international institutions like the United Nations (UN).  The global community took a giant step towards holding the perpetrators of the most serious international crimes accountable to the rule of law by adopting the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court on July 17, 1998. 

Bringing the violators of these serious crimes to justice, however, has proven to be easier said than done. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has encountered numerous practical and conceptual obstacles in its efforts to become an impartial and effective instrument of justice.  Some commentators like Brett Schafer and Steven Groves believe the ICC is so deeply flawed that it even violates international law in addition to threatening state sovereignty (1). 

The paper seeks to review the history, structure and effectiveness of the ICC, including its recent agreement on a definition for the Crime of Aggression. I will specifically examine practical objections to the ICC, its conceptual challenges, its evolving role in matters of peace and justice, and how it is challenging the traditional role of the UN Security Council (UNSC).   

The ICC’s jurisdictional reach will be examined in detail as well as its procedural safeguards. Finally, I’ll review some ways the United States can effectively cooperate with the ICC as a non-party partner while simultaneously advancing its foreign policy and national security interests and resisting the trend in international law towards pooled sovereignty and global governance. 

The views and opinions expressed in this paper are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces.]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-last-word-on-justice-the-impact-of-the-international-criminal-court-on-the-future-of-international-justice-and-its-rocky-road-to-legitimacy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">244</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>International Law’s Expansion into Individual Affairs: A Tug of  War over Tradition, Jurisdiction and Universal Human Rights</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-laws-expansion-into-individual-affairs-a-tug-of-war-over-tradition-jurisdiction-and-universal-human-rights/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-laws-expansion-into-individual-affairs-a-tug-of-war-over-tradition-jurisdiction-and-universal-human-rights/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:13:03 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Free Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adolf Eichmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Convention Against Torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crimes against humanity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customary norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dunoff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[female genital mutilation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICCPR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ICESCR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inalienable rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Covenant on Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moderate degree of pressure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social and Cultural Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ticking time bomb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UDHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN Charter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universal jurisdiction]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=214</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Introduction &#8211; (C) Kapok Tree Diplomacy, July 2010, All rights reserved. Jeff Dwiggins, author. FREE CONTENT As international law extends beyond traditional state-to-state interactions into matters directly involving the rights]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/international-laws-expansion-into-individual-affairs-a-tug-of-war-over-tradition-jurisdiction-and-universal-human-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">214</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Efficacy of the Modern Institution of International Law</title>
		<link>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-efficacy-of-the-modern-institution-of-international-law/</link>
					<comments>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-efficacy-of-the-modern-institution-of-international-law/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truepath]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2013 14:51:09 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[International Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intl Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American Law Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conceptual changes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[definition of international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hugo Grotius]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Bolton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jus cogens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal obligation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legitimacy of international law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missouri v. Holland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[municipal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinio juris sive necessitatis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peremptory norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rainbow Warrior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid v. Covert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-executing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlement of international disputes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sources and evidences]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terra nullius]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[territorial issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treaties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treaty reservations]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/?p=202</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[International law has evolved into a growing and complex body of rules and norms that states consent to based upon their concrete interests in a peaceful, prosperous and stable society. While international law differs and often competes substantively from municipal law, international law plays a predominantly positive role in allowing nations to benefit from the binding obligations derived from its sources. 

This essay will cover a brief history and definition of international law in Section One to include its sources and evidences followed by a comparison of international law with municipal law in Section Two with an emphasis on treaties.  The paper will conclude with some observations on how well the framework of international law actually works. 

The views and opinions expressed in this paper are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces.]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://kapoktreediplomacy.com/hp_wordpress/the-efficacy-of-the-modern-institution-of-international-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">202</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
