Habermas - Habernas – Does the Constitutionalization of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Habernas – Does the Constitutionalization of International Law Still Have a Chance? Politically Constituted World Society vs. World Republic Classical international law and “sovereign equality”- Kant deplores the idea of wars of aggression and questions the right of sovereign states to go to war, i.e. the jus ad bellum . - Classical international law represents nation-states as participants in a strategic game: o states enjoy sufficient de facto independence to make autonomous choices and act on their own preferences; o guided by the imperatives of self-assertion and self-defense, they pursue exclusively their own preferences (understood as “national interests”) and the security of their citizens. o any state can form coalitions with any other state and they all compete to increase their political power through their ability to exert military threats.- International law lays down the rules of the game and determines: o the qualifications that potential participants must satisfy: a sovereign state must be able to exercise effective control over its social and territorial boundaries and maintain law and order; o the admission requirements: state sovereignty rests on international recognition; and o the actual status: a sovereign state can conclude treaties with other states. When conflicts arise, it has the right to declare war on other states without offering supporting reasons ( just ad bellum ), but it may not intervene in the internal affairs of other states (the prohibition on intervention). - These principles entail a series of consequences: o there is no supranational authority to sanction and punish violations of international law; o a sovereign state can violate standards of prudence and efficiency, but it cannot violate moral norms: its behavior is treated as morally indifferent; o the immunity enjoyed by states extends to their sovereign states reserve the right to prosecute and try crimes committed in war (in accordance with the just in bello ); o third parties may remain neutral vis-à-vis warring parties.- Thus, normative classical international law: “sovereign equality”—give equal status to sovereign states, a status that rests on the reciprocal recognition of subjects of international law, without regard to differences in size of population, territory, and actual political or economic power. Price: acceptance of war as the mechanism for regulating conflicts and thus the freedom to resort to military force. - For Kant, not only are “wars of punishment and extermination” a moral scandal but even cabinet wars conducted with standing armies are incompatible “with the right of humanity in our own person,” because a state that hires its citizens “to kill or be killed” degrades them into “mere machines.”degrades them into “mere machines....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/15/2012 for the course POLSCI 495 taught by Professor Rensmann during the Fall '10 term at University of Michigan.

Page1 / 4

Habermas - Habernas – Does the Constitutionalization of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online