The war in Iraq has reignited the passionate humanitarian intervention debate. President George W. Bush surprised many observers in his second inaugural address when he promised to oppose tyranny and oppression, and this in a world not always willing or ready to join in that fight. Humanitarian intervention is again on the forefront of world politics.

This paper explores the relationship between normative international political theory and the politics of international law. It begins by arguing that a gap between the normative (in moral terms) and the moral (in legal and social terms) still exists in the literature before going on to examine an approach to closing this gap. This approach, it is argued, is common to a plurality of theoretical approaches including liberal cosmopolitanism, social constructivism and forms of particularism. In exploring ‘institutional moral reasoning’ or (...) ‘social moral epistemology’ the paper argues that respecting the institutional autonomy of the international legal order is a key component of the approach. In order to test the extent to which the various positions do respect the autonomy of the legal order the paper engages with an analysis of the extent to which human rights have become the key constitutive norm of global politics. (shrink)

While there is a growing body of work on moral issues and global governance in the fields of global justice and international relations, little work has connected principles of global health justice with those of global health governance for a theory of global health. Such a theory would enable analysis and evaluation of the current global health system and would ethically and empirically ground proposals for reforming it to more closely align with moral values. Global health governance has been framed (...) as an issue of national security, human security, human rights, and global public goods. The global health governance literature is essentially untethered to a theorized framework to illuminate or evaluate governance. This article ties global health justice and ethics to principles for governing the global health realm, developing a theoretical framework for global and domestic institutions and actors. (shrink)

The English School analytical framework concerning theformation of order in international relations posits that states establish orderthrough rules and institutions within the framework of common interests andvalues to protect against anarchy. State-centred orders with limited civil societycooperation are pluralistic, while their converse are solidarist. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations was established in 1967 by Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore,and Indonesia based on common interests, such as strengthening sovereigntyand creating stable relations in the face of anarchic problems like communismand internal (...) instability. In numerous conventions ASEAN has adopted variousnorms, such as respect for the sovereignty of the states, the rule of law, non-useof power, peaceful resolution of disputes, and non-interference in other states.All these norms showed that the primary purpose of ASEAN is to protect statesovereignty and interests and to establish peaceful regional relations. The factthat state sovereignty is at the forefront, with limited cooperation of non-stateactors, shows that the ASEAN regional order is pluralist. This article analysesthe emergence and appearance of the ASEAN regional order in the context of the ES. (shrink)