Chapter 47 - global prohibition regimes: the evolution of norms in international society

Question 1

prohibiting norms

Answer 1

norms both in international law and in domestic criminal law that prohibit involvement of state and nonstate actors in particular activities
+ implicit rules and patterns that govern the behavior of state and nonstate actors + moral principles of individuals

e.g.

• piracy
• slavery
• hijacking
• counterfeiting of national currencies
• human trafficking

Question 2

Why do people conform to a particular norm?

Answer 2

• Because they believe the norm is just and should be followed
  
  • Because adherence to the norm coincides with their other principal interests
  • Because they fear the consequences from defying the norm
  • Because conforming to the norm has become a matter of habit or custom

Question 3

Interntaional regimes: eco + political interests vs norms

Answer 3

reflect the economic and political interests of the dominant members of international society
+ moral and emotional factors related to neither political nor economic advantage play a role (e.g. Religion, humanitarian sentiments, compassion, paternalism)

Esp. For global prohibition regimes tend to involve moral and emotional considerations more so than most other laws and regimes

Question 4

How should actions of states be understood?

Answer 4

Culmination of external pressures and domestic political struggles

• in which national and transnational organizations shape the actions of states as well as the actions and opinions of diverse societies
• in which the norms of dominant societies are internationalized and internalized by diverse societies throughout the world

Question 5

Why do international prohibition regimes emerge?

Answer 5

• To protect the interests of the state and other powerful members of society
  
  • To deter, suppress, and punish undesirable activities
  • To provide for order, security, and justice among members of a community
  • To give force and symbolic representation to the moral values, beliefs and prejudices of those who make the laws

*criminal laws can evolve into international prohibition regimes (very few do)

Question 6

What type of crimes have become the subject of international prohibition regimes?

Answer 6

Only crimes that evidence a strong transnational dimension + for which unilateral and bilateral law enforcement measures are inadequate (e.g. because of sovereignty concerns or practical inability for one country to do everything)

Question 7

In what respects do international prohibition regimes amount to more than the sum of the unilateral acts, bilateral relationships and international conventions that constitute them?

Answer 7

1. provide an element of standardization
2. they minimize or eliminate the potential havens from which certain crimes can be committed and to which criminals can flee to escape prosecution and punishment

(3. create an expection of cooperation that governments challenge only at the cost of some international embarrassment)

Question 8

moral proselytism
+ transnational moral entrepreneurs

Answer 8

moral proselytism: compulsion to convert others to one’s beliefs + to remake the world in one’s own image

international prohibition regimes contribute to proselytizing efforts of governments and non-governmental transnational organizations -> they function as transnational moral entrepreneurs

transnational moral entrepreneurs: groups that mobilize popular opinion and political support + stimulate and assist in creation of like-minded organisations + elevate their objective beyond its identification with the national interests of their government

Question 9

features prohibition regimes that attain global proportions

Answer 9

• not all are global: can also be in a multinational region or alliance of states confronting a common threat (e.g. Council of Europe regional antiterrorism convention)

mostly: need to minimize ‘‘regime leakage’’ by eliminating actual and potential havens and markets for transnational criminals

other features are moral in nature:
- global adherence to the norms of a particular prohibition regime

Question 10

procedural prohibition regimes

Answer 10

focus on international cooperation against crime: extradition, mutual legal assistance, transfer of criminal proceedings, transfer of prisoners etc.

they are limited in scope: consensus on procedure in criminal justice matters often harder to achieve than on substantive prohibition regimes

Question 11

universal international society

Answer 11

gradual homogenization and globalization of norms developed initially among the European states

• ground rules of diplomatic interaction and protection
• recognition of an identifiable corpus of international law embodying common principles regarding state behavior and obligations
• growing acknowledgement that all individuals are entitled to basic protections of life, property and contract

Question 11

cosmopolitan moral views

Answer 11

focus on how states and individuals treat individual human beings

transcends the state, thereby de-politicizing the individual and emphasizing the existence of an international society of human beings sharing common moral bonds

this view has been getting bigger in IR the last 3 centuries (when this article was written)

Question 11

do states hold moral views?

Answer 11

that’s not what this article argues: Nadelmann argues that the capacity of particular moral arguments to influence governments stems from transnational moral entrepreneurs and powerful individual advocates within the government

Question 12

the role of Europe and the US

Answer 12

evolution of global society = centrality of Western Europe and the US

to an extent virtually unprecedented in world history, a few European states and the US proved successful in proselytizing to diverse societies: imposing their norms on foreign regimes around the world

Question 13

common evolutionary pattern global prohibition regimes
- 4 or 5 stages

Answer 13

1. activity is considered normal
2. activity is redefined as a problem by moral entrepreneurs
3. regime demands criminalization of the activity by states through diplomacy
4. criminalization and police action are deployed international institutions and conventions
5. incidence of the proscribed activity is greatly reduced (not every regime accomplishes this step + no regime was capable of this stage before the 19th century due to not yet eliminated/neutralized effective vacuums of sovereign authority)

Question 14

progress norms of internal and external sovereignty

Answer 14

norms of external sovereignty and nonintervention have progressed more rapidly than the effective internal sovereignty of many states -> regime enforcers in this century are less able than their forebears to use coercive actions against dissident states and other regime violators

Question 15

criminal laws + international prohibition regimes are particularly ineffective in suppressing activities which

Answer 15

• require limited and readily available resources and no particular expertise to commit
• are easily concealed
• are unlikely to be reported to the authorities
• consumer demand is substantial, resilient and not readily substituted for (e.g. global drug enforcement regime not really succesful)

Question 16

piracy prior to the seveneenth century

Answer 16

international norms limited in scope and effect

piracy widely sanctioned in much of the world

Question 17

premises of medieval international law

Answer 17

George Swarzenberger

1. war basic state of international relations in the absence of an agreed state of truce or peace
2. unless exception were made by means of individual safe conduct or treaty, rulers saw themselves entitled to treat foreigners at their absolute discretion
3. high seas were no-man’s-land where anyone might do as he pleased

-> political actors saw piracy as source of wealth and political power

Question 18

piracy 16th century

Answer 18

expansion European maritime commerce -> incidence of piracy increased dramatically

mostly (unofficially) sponsored by European governments:

• sanctioned piracy: sponsored by monarch, got a free pass
• unsanctioned piracy: often possible to find sponsors and protectors among high-ranking officials

Question 19

piracy 17th century

Answer 19

Europe divided by political and religious differences, one shared objective: desirability of crushing Turkish pirates (prospect of infidels capturing Christians -> piracy seen as urgent problem)

end 17th century:

• increase volume of trade and diplomacy
• private fiefdoms and armies were coopted or eliminated (governments wanted to monopolize force)
• pirates were warned to abandon their ways or risk the wrath of increasingly powerful navies
• Royal Navy important role in
• peacetime no longer seen as anarchy, it increasingly promised a degree of security

! piracy was undergoing a transformation from being a national industry to becoming an international threat

Question 20

corsair

Answer 20

zeerover

Question 21

equal views/development of piracy?

Answer 21

European states regularized their relations in/around the European continent, but not e.g. in the Americas and Asia

on-European states (+ some of the colonies) regarded the European efforts against piracy and privateering as unwarranted and unwelcome infringements into local struggles over power and wealth

mid 18th century: most American colonies had acceded to the ban on piracy
elsewhere: government-sanctioned piracy persisted until well into the 19th century

Question 22

privateering + government-sanctioned privateering during wartime

Answer 22

not effectively deligitimized until 19th century

nations relied on privateers to help in war

Question 23

Declaration of Paris 1856

Answer 23

GB, France, Russia, Prussia, Austria, Sardinia and the Porte

formally abolishing privateering

• US refused, as its nay was small and thus wanted/claimed it should keep the option of privateering for in wartime
• end 19th century: US navy had grown -> outlawed privateering

Question 24

globalization of the norms against piracy

Answer 24

piracy was increasingly seen as an evil in its own right (pirate est hostice humani generis)

• economic and security interests of the most powerful states (monopolizing forces of violence on the high seas)
• larceny at sea became less justifiable as the high seas were no longer perceived as no-man’s-land (ir became more regularized + orderly)

Question 25

when is an international criminal law most potent?

Answer 25

when it reflects not just self-interest, but a broadly acknowledged moral obligation

law against piracy was the first to attain such a consensus
+
international regime dedicated to the enforcement of this law was the first to attain global proportions

Question 26

virtual elimination of piratical activities from the high seas?

Answer 26

• privateering could not subsist without active support of governments
• from the mid 17th century: powerful states eliminated one by one the vacuums of de jure and de facto sovereignty that pirates depended on
• pirates vulnerable to government action
• fatal blow to piracy: development of steam vessels (pirates didn’t have enough resources)

latter of the 19th century: piracy all but eliminated on the high seas

persists only on a small scale today: reflects inevitably limited capabilities of governments to eliminate entirely anything that lies outside its total control

Question 27

lecture
- locating the text

Answer 27

• constructivism
• literature on norms

Question 28

lecture
- objectives of the article

Answer 28

to discuss how and why particular norms have proven more or less succesful in suppressing deviant activities

how and why some norms have evolved into global prohibition regimes