Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Contrasting Perspectives And Preemptive Strike: The United States, France, And The War On Terror, Sophie Clavier
Contrasting Perspectives And Preemptive Strike: The United States, France, And The War On Terror, Sophie Clavier
Maine Law Review
A few years ago, Samuel P. Huntington's article in Foreign Affairs, "The Clash of Civilizations?" described a "West vs. the Rest" conflict leading to the assumption of an essentially unified Western civilization settling "[g]lobal political and security issues ... effectively ... by a directorate of the United States, Britain and France" and centered around common core values "using international institutions, military power and economic resources to run the world in ways that will . . . protect Western interests . . . .” Against the West, the specter of disorder and fundamentalism was looming and would precipitate conflicts. This widely …
Unilateral And Multilateral Preventive Self-Defense, Stéphanie Bellier
Unilateral And Multilateral Preventive Self-Defense, Stéphanie Bellier
Maine Law Review
The governing principle of the collective security system created by the United Nations Charter in 19451 is the rule prohibiting the use of force in Article 2(4), which provides that "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purpose of the United Nations." This rule prohibiting the use of force was considered revolutionary at the time because it transformed into international law ideas which had for centuries, if not millennia, preoccupied the minds of people …
Thought Versus Action: The Influence Of Legal Tradition On French And American Approaches To International Law, Dana Zartner Falstrom
Thought Versus Action: The Influence Of Legal Tradition On French And American Approaches To International Law, Dana Zartner Falstrom
Maine Law Review
In the months leading up to the U.S. intervention in Iraq in March 2003, the dialogue between the United States and France on the appropriate course of action to take in response to Iraq's report on its weapons of mass destruction revealed differences between these traditional allies as to the options available under international law. These differences did not center on the goals of any proposed action-both sides in fact agreed upon the goals, which were to ensure there were no weapons of mass destruction; to prevent an increase in terrorist activity; and to address the continuing violations of international …