This interesting piece obviously covers much more than just international law. But there are quite a few references to international law matters we will discuss in class. For example, reference is made to those who think that international law has not fulfilled its promise. The same is supposedly true for globalization, which, of course, in no small measure is the result of or achieved through international law instruments. The global rule of law, so it said, is at best applied opportunistically. And there are other references, especially if one takes into account the close relationship between international law, international relations, democracy and the rule of law.
Your task is to critique this text from the perspective of our topic, international law. Your will have broad discretion in how you wish to approach this task. The links I have mentioned above are only examples. It will require some careful thought and some reading around for you to be able to make up your specific topic, to decide on your personal approach to this task. I ask only two things: Ensure the connection to the text remains visible and ensure that the non-suspecting reader will know that your piece is mainly about international law even if you decide and that is certainly possible to link your international law analyses to broader questions. International law is, after all, a legal order that yields the framework for other areas of conduct and thus for other areas of study.
Carefully read the expectations below. Research effort and coherence of text are the main criteria.
In essence you are writing a (law) journal article. Thus you can take any (law) scholarly journal article as a template.
Structure your paper. Use informative headings and sub-headings to guide the reader through your paper. Create a table of contents from these headings and subheadings at the beginning of your paper. There is a function for this in WORD and if you are not familiar with it, now is the time to learn to use it.
In order to write this paper you will need to do research, i.e. find relevant authority in international case law (if and where applicable) and (in this case probably more so) in the literature, and to analyse these materials. Any insight you gain from these materials and that you use in your paper must be properly footnoted. In law we usually follow the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (3rd ed., 2010, https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1586203/FinalOnlinePDF-2012Reprint.pdf). In this particular course of the SWMS, however, you are probably faced with many citation styles and certainly political scientists are known to sometimes take, dare I say, a strict and peculiar approach. In our unit you can chose any style you want. What is important is that you actually do reference properly (omitting to do so constitutes plagiarism!) and that your referencing style allows me as the reader to identify your source without further research of my own. In other words it is sufficient in this unit that you think about the purpose of referencing and the reader. If that is too vague for you, then follow the above mentioned Australian Guide to Legal Citation.
You are expected to employ your critical and analytical skills in this essay. Avoid mere description or regurgitation unless absolutely necessary for the reader to understand your text and do not block-quote excessively. Both your observations and your use of other people\’s writing should reflect this critical/analytical dimension. In sum, your intellectual input should be clearly discernible in the paper.
You are not marked for your political or social views or opinions, but rather for your ability to present coherent, rational and logical arguments, properly supported by authority.
You are also marked on your ability to express yourself clearly, logically and succinctly. Poor expression, grammar, punctuation and spelling will detract from your overall mark.
Remember to include a bibliography at the end of your assignment. Your bibliography should list the sources that you have engaged with during the preparation and research of your assignment. It is a good idea to list primary and secondary sources under separate sub-headings in your bibliography.
Please note that your research effort, visible in the bibliography (the bibliography is a summary of all materials used whereas the footnotes specify where and exactly what idea was used from this source; every item listed in the bibliography must also appear in a footnote in the text!) and demonstrated by your engagement with the material you have found, analysed and implemented into your own writing (and properly referenced in the footnotes) will be the central pillar for the mark you will receive.
Your research paper should not exceed 3000/2500 words (see above). The word limit applies to the file as a whole, i.e. text, footnotes, table of contents, bibliography (3000 words). You may opt not to count the bibliography in which case the word limit will be 2500 words. The word count including the option you chose should be printed on the cover page. The word count is primarily there to protect you. It is not a bean- counting exercise and is relevant mainly for equity reasons to ensure no one has an advantage because they wrote much more. Even if you are below the word limit you should still review your text for redundancy and succinctness and more so if you are above.
Article of reference to base the topic on.
The Opinion Pages | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER
The New Ideology of the New Cold War
Jochen Bittner AUG. 1, 2016
HAMBURG, Germany In its heyday, Communism claimed that capitalism had betrayed the worker. So what should we make of Moscows new battle cry, that democracy has betrayed the voter?
Its a worldview that has become increasingly clear through the era of Russias president, Vladimir V. Putin, via a mosaic of public political statements, off-the-record conversations with academics and intelligence insights. Lets call it orderism.
Orderism has started to challenge democracy in many parts of the world Turkey, Poland, the Philippines. But Mr. Putins Russia believes it holds the copyright on this formula, and sees it as the sharp end of the wedge it is trying to drive among the nations of the West.
The ideologys basic political premise is that liberal democracy and international law have not lived up to their promise. Instead of creating stability, they have produced inequality and chaos. The secular religion worshiped in the Western parliaments was globalization (or, in the European Unions case, Europeanization). These beliefs, according to the orderists, overlooked the downsides.
The most obvious downside, according to orderism, is that open borders and global trade have led to vanishing jobs and mass migration. At the same time, a mental borderlessness has shaken liberal societies: With potentially every traditional value now up for negotiation, no habit, custom or institution is sacred. The same leniency that allows for the free sale of marijuana, same-sex marriages and the crowning of a bearded drag queen named Conchita Wurst as the winner of the 2014 Eurovision song contest also tolerates militant Islamism within Western borders.
It is the same moral weakness and decadence, orderism warns, that preceded the fall of previous empires. Like Nero, the establishment is fiddling in its palaces while Rome burns.
Orderism also claims that, on the global stage, international law is beaten into submission by the rules of the strongest, with terrible outcomes. Even the West, orderists claim, adheres to the global rule of law only when it suits its interests. When it doesnt, the United States and its allies ignore or circumvent United Nations provisions. Orderists believe that events in Ukraine in 2014 are Exhibit A for Western hypocrisy: The United States encouraged and financed a coup in Kiev, they say, and installed obedient politicians afterward. The rule of law and liberal multilateralism, they insist, are just Trojan horses, carrying the West closer and closer to their borders.
Thus it is an act of self-defense for Russia, in the orderist worldview, to secure the Crimean Peninsula, with its sprawling Russian Navy port; to increase military spending; and to hold frequent military exercises along the Russian-NATO borders. Just as the West contained an aggressive East in the 20th century, orderism believes the East must now contain a megalomaniac and arrogant West to prevent the spread of even more chaos.
Orderism prioritizes stability over democracy and offers an alternative to the moral abyss of laissez-faire societies. Russia stands as a model for this new social contract. This contract is built on patriotism, traditional gender roles, Orthodox Christianity, military strength and, at the top, a benevolent czar who will promise only as much as he can deliver (provided the public gives him sufficient support, he can deliver a lot). Orderism may not yet boast the same economic performance as liberalism, but its adherents insist that the cohesion and the common spirit of an orderly nation will allow it to outlive the inevitable downturn of the disorderly West.
Its easy to see why, especially for those who have suffered dislocation and anomie under liberal democracy, orderism is appealing. But just as the utopian promises of Communism were merely a fig leaf for tyranny, the official face of orderism hides something much darker. Order is attractive only until it stifles, and then represses. Unchecked autocrats turn on the weakest and most vulnerable as scapegoats, and lash out in foreign misadventures to divert attention from problems at home. Society breaks down; fear reigns. Orderism ultimately fails to deliver on its own promises.
What is striking, though, is how compatible orderism is with the attitudes of many voters in the United States and Europe. Donald J. Trumps campaign boils down to a promise of tough order. And the decision of British voters to leave the European Union, catalyzed by the promise of the U.K. Independence Party and others of an orderly, independent England, was nothing but an attempt to stop the frightening and discomfiting effects of globalization. Part of the difficulty in dealing with orderism is that it is ideological without being an ideology. It is mercurial, pragmatic and cynical; its meaning and values change to fit the circumstances.
Yet, in tackling todays orderism, there is one lesson the West can draw from yesterdays fight against Communism. Western leaders must respond to criticisms of liberal democracy, not simply reject them as the product of an insidious, anti-liberal worldview. If Franklin D. Roosevelt and Western Europes postwar leaders had dismissed calls for stronger welfare states as Communist-inspired, they would have invited revolution. Instead, they built progressive state institutions that drained the appeal of anti-liberalism.
If jobs are lost and terrorist attacks are mounting, democratic politicians have to have the steady nerves and fresh ideas to carry out the necessary repair work. In this new clash of worldviews, we need a new generation of Roosevelts, Adenauers and Monnets, leaders who will take on orderisms challenge without lashing out at its adherents. A calm adversarial spirit is what can make democracy great again.
Jochen Bittner is a political editor for the weekly newspaper Die Zeit and a contributing opinion writer.
Existing concepts and key words to form a topic from
Avoid getting into topic about international relations or Politics too much!
See red sections in article- this is key points that can be written about.
It says international law has failed on its promises- so what is the aim and promise of international law? Can we can argue that it has not failed, because it is still a important framework for peace, coordination, cooperation and human rights?
The rule of law in international law- what is the rule of law
The west hegemony, and what Orderism thinks
Critical perspective of Orderism
Need footnote referencing, and Bibliography.
Minimum of 10 Academic Articles.
Please contact me for some articles I already found.
I can also send you slides from lectures to keep the topic in line with the course
Please contact me early to discuss your ideas and we can refine before you do all the writing.
Currently 1 writers are viewing this order