| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
079197
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
059411
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2005.
|
| Description |
xiii, 217p.
|
| Series |
Europe and the nation state
|
| Standard Number |
0415339855
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 049275 | 337.4047/JOH 049275 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
167771
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article proposes that although both Russia and the West claim to support an international order founded on a mutually agreed set of rules, their views of that order are very different. For Russia it is a system in which the same set of rules applies to everybody, and which might therefore be termed “symmetric.” For the West, it is a system in which those deemed “just” have more rights than those deemed “unjust,” and which might therefore be termed “asymmetric.” Through an analysis of recent trends in just war theory, the article will show that the asymmetric Western view of the international order is a natural outcome not only of the West’s relative power but also of human rights doctrines. The supremacy of these doctrines is not, however, fully accepted by Russia. Overcoming Western-Russian tensions requires, among other things, that the two sides find a mutually acceptable view of the international order. The logic outlined in this article demonstrates, however, that this will be difficult to achieve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
094584
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
064842
|
|
|