Skip to main content

Liberalism, Democracy, and International Law — An English School Approach

  • Chapter
After Liberalism?

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in International Relations Series ((PSIR))

Abstract

Liberalism may be in decline, but democracy is in the ascendancy. According to Freedom House, the US-based non-governmental organisation that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, the number of democracies has increased from 41 (out of 150) states in 1974 to 117 of 195 states in 2011 (www.freedomhouse.org). “Democracy” became the general call for reform in the former Soviet satellite states and dependencies, and guided the reform process in both. It has become the chief justification for secessions, as in East Timor; and the present Arab Spring is being dominated by calls for democracy. Most importantly, the United States has declared that it will give support to democracy movements in countries struggling to escape from autocratic rule, a declaration made in the face of a strong non-intervention norm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Acevedo, D. E. (1993), “The Haitian Crisis and the OAS Response”, in L. F. Damrosch (ed.) Enforcing Restraint, New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 119–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albert, D. (1991), “The United States Invasion of Panama: Unilateral Military Intervention to Effectuate a Change of Government”, Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, 1, 259 (recovered 29 May 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Badescu, C. and Weiss, T. (2010), “Misrepresenting R2P and Advancing Norms”, International Studies Perspectives, 22, 354–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, J. T. (2001), “Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change”, International Organization, 55, 553–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donelly, J. (1986), “International Human Rights: A Regime Analysis”, International Organization, 40, 599–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998), “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”, International Organization, 52, 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, S. and Kelley, J. (2011), “The Limits of Election Monitoring”, Foreign Affairs, 28 June (recovered 5 December 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. (2000), The Global Covenant, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. (1992), “The Declaratory Tradition in Modern International Law”, in T. Nardin and D. Mapel (eds) Traditions of International Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 42–61.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keck, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998), Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, D. M. (1999), Decision-Making in the UN Security Council: The Case of Haiti, Oxford: Oxford University Press; (2004), “Look beyond the ‘Republic of Port-au-Prince’ Intervention in Haiti”, International Herald Tribune, 3 March (recovered 29 May 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardin, T. (1983), Law, Morality and the Relations of States, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onuma, Y. (2003), “International Law in and with International Politics: The Functions of International Law in International Society”, European Journal of International Law, 14, 105–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich, R. (2001), “Bringing Democracy into International Law”, Journal of Democracy, 12, 20–34 (recovered 29 March 2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T., Ropp, S. and Sikkink, K. (eds) (1999), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, S. (2008), “Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Democracy Promotion”, Global Governance, 14, 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, P. (2000), “The English School’s Approach to International Law”, in C. Navari (ed.) Theorising International Society: English School Methods, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 167–188.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2013 Cornelia Navari

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Navari, C. (2013). Liberalism, Democracy, and International Law — An English School Approach. In: Friedman, R., Oskanian, K., Pardo, R.P. (eds) After Liberalism?. Palgrave Studies in International Relations Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137303769_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics