Of recent times, this theoretical approach has not been accepted as a result of several reasons. Firstly, the private abuses of diplomatic agents negates the idea of representative character as it calls for the question- why should a state cover the evils of a person who goes about his personal degenerate habits? Why should a state place a person above the law when he is not actually representing a state? These questions rightly bring the mind to the actual issue of representation; in modern time as now, are diplomatic agents representing a state or the people of a state? If in the position that diplomatic agents are representing the interest of the people of a state then, the immunity for private acts should be that granted the people of …show more content…
Although they have many similarities, the principle of exterritoriality has to be distinguished from the principle of extraterritoriality. While the principle of exterritoriality refers to the immunities vested in an envoy due to international law, extraterritoriality is defined as pertaining to the ‘establishment of an international servitude by elevating the nationality principle of jurisdiction over the territorial principle’. Exterritoriality theory proposes the idea that the diplomatic agents (staff and families), the diplomatic mission (residential and official premises) and their possessions (transportation included) is not of the territory of the receiving state. Though in the receiving state, the diplomatic envoy is considered and to be treated as still domiciling and operating in his own state while the receiving state is seen an extension of the sending state. This theory was used to exempt diplomats from the jurisdiction of a receiving state as a sovereign would demand his subjects pay loyalty to him only . The term stems from the idea that such persons or things are deemed not to be within the territory of the sovereign where they are actually present. Hugo Grotius was of the view that extra territoriality of the diplomatic agent means that in spite of being physically present upon the soil of the country to which they are accredited, they remain for all purposes upon the soil of the country to which they represent.
The effect of government delegation in a republic is that the views of the public are “refined and enlarged” to a certain extent by being passed through the citizens whom they elected to govern them. This causes the voice of the public to become more concerned with the public good rather than if the people were ruling themselves as is done in a democracy. However, this action can also backfire if people are elected who do not have the best interest of the people as their first priority and corrupt the system by “betraying the interests of the people” they are representing.
Throughout the rather unusual book, “Theories of International Politics and Zombies”, written by prominent Tufts University Professor Dr. Daniel W. Drezner, the readers of this publication are given insight to the various possibilities of governmental responses (referring to the theories of international relations) to a zombie plague. According to Professor Drezner today, in age, the world faces several “natural sources of fear” (pg. 1) and these issues may range from acts of terrorism, deadly contagions, financial crisis, global cyberwarfare, etc. However, Dr. Drezner stresses the growing importance of the ridiculed issue of a zombie apocalypse, considering it an equally important matter, if not a more significant challenge which humanity will eventually face. He describes what sorts of measures modern governments would take to prevent said calamity.
Isolationism was a policy that restricted the United States of America from involving in the affairs of other nations in Europe but instead concentrate in its own development and internal issues that were of great importance. This isolationist policy gained a greater influence especially from the conservatives during the beginning of the cold war (Brands, 2011). This was because of several policies and feelings of the conservatives that defined the importance of this isolationist policy. The reasons or feelings that made majority of the conservatives in the United States of America to support the policy include; influence by leaders, the hint of anti-elitism and the ideological differences between the conservatives and the liberals. The conservatives were influenced and convinced by some prominent and influential leaders like Joseph Maccarthy who was a republican politician and the senator of Wisconsin state in the United States of America.
One great example of Isolationism is, which is the Policy that tries to refrain from any involvement of with global affairs is would be when, United Staes declined to give aid to the Hungarian Patriots in 1849. In a way it looked liked the United Staes wanted a Seclusion, meaning a state of being private and a way from the other countries and people. The United of America did not want to help and Hungarians. Which was during their battle of lieberation.. Due to this fact America actually disregarded the isolationism when the U.s aided the leaders of Hunagry to be released from jail. So they kinda did help in a way.
This is evident in modern times when prominent figures, like President Nixon, managed to evade punishment for crimes committed in office. The unjust nature of such circumstances becomes apparent when considering that an average person would swiftly be imprisoned for the same offenses. Thus, balance becomes crucial in understanding Hand's conception of liberty and the idea of a better
From the beginning, the agency that Zimbardo talks about was taken for granted. All accuses expressed they were just following orders, doing their job, acting on behalf of a greater good. Complementing Zimbardo ’s argument we must understand and trace back the ideology, and mechanisms are put in place in the macrostructures which shape institutions and set up the situations that could take our agency away.
States do not sufficiently mirror private associations, therefore they cannot be used as examples of groups that have the right to exclude similar to that of nations. I additionally claim that there is an extreme conflict between a state’s right to exclude and a general right of association among individuals. An individual’s right to associate has greater moral significance than the right of states to elect who to include. This being true, individual freedom of association actually supports the idea that individuals can migrate across national boundaries. However, even if one does not agree with this stance, Wellman’s premises fail to establish a strong enough argument for the right of states to exclude potential migrants
The United States refused to give aid to Hungarian patriots because they were so concentrated on expanding onto western lands. The U.S wanted the country to reach from east to west, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. The United States was embodying Manifest Destiny. I think that this is an example of isolationism. Isolationism is a policy of remaining apart from the affairs of other nations.
History 3.07 Assignment Isolationism, Intervention, and Imperialism Isolationism is when a state or country tries to prevent themselves from being involved in political affairs. The event that best represents isolationism is The United States declines to give aid to Hungarian patriots in 1849. At the time there was a revolution going on in Hungry, that later became a war for freedom, or independence. The Hungarians were trying to break free from the Austrian Empire that was being run by the Hapsburg Monarchy. This represents isolationism because the U.S decided to limit their involvement in the Hungarians
The source presented provided a perspective opposed to isolationism and governments who implement the policy in their nations. Furthermore, the source implements that no nation can be a democratic state if it puts into effect the isolationism policy. However, this source should not be embraced at all. First, for a nation to be considered a democratic state it must posses a government that derives its power from the citizens and is accountable to them for its use. Furthermore isolationism is a policy of non-involvement in international affairs, which does not infringe on the rights of citizens provided that the nation desires it.
America has been a beacon of hope and prosperity for her citizens as well as scores of immigrants. However, the same America has historically demonstrated indifference for humanity by employing slavery, implementing social policy that contributes to depriving the most vulnerable citizens of their unalienable rights, establishing economic strategies that benefit the few, but cripple the majority of Americans and other global citizens. American exceptionalism heavily influences American foreign policy in the ways we support and execute diplomacy, legislations and the way in which we assert ourselves into the lives of others, foreign and domestically. In my opinion we are a country that has little to no regard for human life, morality and dignity.
Introduction In this article, Eric Poser has elaborated several reasons which made human rights a failure in international legal regime. The most highlighted issues are hypocrite policies of US and EU which has directly questioned credibility and integrity of their law and justice. The second reason is role played by Russia and China, the two major economic powers who in order to sustain their power, are involved in human rights violations. The third most important reason is standardized model of Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is ideal but not practical in various countries.
There are reasons for this, first is that, internal implementation of international law is always conditioned by a rule of the state’s municipal law. Clearly stating that international law’ internal interpretation is always governed by the municipal constitution. Second is that in national courts, even a monist country, their courts may fail sometimes to execute treaties which are binding under international law. United State law is an example of non-self-executing treaty. While dualist country’s courts, unincorporated treaties are given limited effect on the internal process.
As the famous saying goes, “The strong do what they will while the weak do what they must," so let it be with the counties of the world and the role they play in International Politics. Eurocentrism is a concept that places Europe at the centre of the world. Assuming that it is self containing and self representing, the entire world is looked at with Europe at the centre. Eurocentrism bias leads to an illogical understanding of International Relations and makes politics and judgement to incline in the favour of the powerful. In this essay, I will critique the Eurocentric nature of International Relations theory and world politics.
The question is whether a matter is essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a state or not has to be decided by the Security Council which is controlled by the five permanent members of the United Nations. The availability of the veto power in the hands of the permanent members of the Security Council is a major obstacle in solving international problems. There is no certainty for international law. The international law has failed to maintain order and peace in the world for many