Query Result Set
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:967Hits:21423601Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

  Hide Options
Sort Order Items / Page
BRONSTHER, JACOB (2) answer(s).
 
SrlItem
1
ID:   192148


Carbon Time Machine / Bronsther, Jacob   Journal Article
Bronsther, Jacob Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract The politics of multilateral emissions treaties are pathological. To succeed, such treaties must overcome: (1) the free-rider problem in the international sphere; (2) domestic constituencies that favor the production and sale of fossil fuels, the most important of which is often the general public; (3) resentment from developing nations asked to sacrifice their growth to mitigate the historic emissions of wealthy countries; (4) an increasingly hostile national security environment; and (5) a skeptical Republican Party, which often leads the most important country for global cooperation. It is no surprise, then, that a 2021 study of 36 countries representing 80 percent of the world’s emissions found that only one country—Gambia—had made commitments in line with the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.Footnote1 That temperature is the accepted, if somewhat arbitrary, tipping point after which the most serious and likely irreversible effects of warming will emerge.Footnote2 We currently sit at 1.1 degrees above such levels,Footnote3 and every year the average atmospheric carbon dioxide level increases like clockwork.Footnote4 Tick tock. Indeed, despite the economic drag from the COVID-19 pandemic, we humans released 36.8 billion tons of carbon in 2022 due to energy combustion and industrial processes—the highest ever annual level.Footnote
Key Words Carbon Time Machine 
        Export Export
2
ID:   151762


Stay the hand of justice? evaluating claims that war crimes trials do more harm than good / Martins, Mark S; Bronsther, Jacob   Journal Article
Martins, Mark S Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract An enduring dilemma in war is whether and how to punish those responsible for war crimes. In this essay, we analyze the most frequent criticisms made by war crimes trial skeptics, including the claims that such trials endanger prospects for peace by encouraging enemies to continue fighting, that they achieve only “victors’ justice” rather than real justice, and that, in any event, they are unnecessary due to the existence of more effective and less costly alternatives. We conclude, in accordance with a “moderate retributivism,” that when carried out consistently with established law and procedure, and when not dramatically outweighed by concerns that trials will exacerbate ongoing or future conflicts, prosecutions are a legitimate, and sometimes necessary, response to violations of the laws of war and international criminal law more broadly.
        Export Export