Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

This work addresses the question of whether the use of military force by the United States in order to stop serious violations of human rights is legally and morally justifiable. The book argues for humanitarian intervention and the right to wage war in defense of human rights.

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

CHOICE Review

The topic of the justification of one state's intervention--political, material, or military--into another state's affairs is at the cutting edge of the field of international law and Teson's work is a provocative contribution to current debate. Teson argues that 1) legal studies must incorporate the philosophical treatments of "values," and must not remain captive to a sterile positivism; 2) rights of states are based solely upon the human rights of individual citizens, hence states have legitimacy only when they rule with the consent of their citizens and only as long as they act to defend and secure human rights; and 3) humanitarian intervention "is a recognized exception to the general prohibition against the use of force in international relations." Despite his support for humanitarian intervention, Teson acknowledges the need to insure that the suffering caused by the intervention not be greater than the suffering the intervention is designed to alleviate. The author fluently considers the theoretical positions of John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin in constructing his own argument about the priority of individual human rights over any claims of national sovereignty. His case is anchored in normative considerations about moral standards rather than any legal justification for intervention. Teson's endorsement of intervention on humanitarian grounds will raise many serious objections, but his thoughtful analysis of the issues and principles involved will enhance the level of discourse in the field of international law. Recommended for law, university, and college students. -V. L. Muller, University of San Diego