Conclusion
The United States is using the theme of rights to build its unilateralism. In order to transform this unilateralism into a convincing universalism, it needs to reinforce its “soft power,” appeal to its partners and convince them of the necessity of its initiatives. Aggressive or offensive rights and crude unilateral military interventions are dangerous per se; they might also endanger American power in the long run. Culturally, this challenge is rooted in America’s origins and in its enthusiastic desire to reform the world. In that respect, the shaping of a so-called “world community,” America is challenging continental Europe and its hierarchical universal power rooted in Catholic verticality. On the contrary, the U.S. conception of power is based on a horizontal dynamic, inspired by the structure of the reformation movement. American coercive rights are defying a universal powerless law; Luther is certainly taking its revenge against Rome. Indeed, as for now, America’s universal competence turns out to be more effective than the ICC. However, if the United States does not take into account its own aspirations to define universal norms, it will be more and more difficult for the United States to justify the necessity of its military decisions. any step back to crude realism could be a fatal regression. It will be a mistake for the pursuit of America’s own interests; it would also most probably endanger the stability of the international system, as it would foster rivalries and hostile reactions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrew, Edward. 1988. Shylock’s Rights: A Grammar of Lockian Claims. Toronto University Press, Toronto.
Aron, Raymond. 1962. Paix et guerre entre les nations. Paris: Calmann-Lévy.
Baziler, Michael J. 2000. “Nuremberg in America: Litigating the Holocaust in U.S. Courts,” University of Richmond Law Review, 34, 1.
Beck, Ulrich. 1999. Global Risk Society. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Bell, Coral. 2003. “Normative Shift,” The National Interest (Winter).
Bethke Elshtain, Jean. 2003. “Coercive Justice,” Daedalus, 8.
Black, Edwin. 2001. IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation. Crown Publishing Group.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1980. Questions de sociologie, Minuit, Paris.
Brilmayer, Lea. 1994. American Hegemony: Political Morality in a One Super Power World, Yale University Press.
Chaumont, Jean-Michel. 1997. La concurrence des victimes. La Découverte, Paris.
Department of State. 1997. U.S. and Allied Efforts to Recover and Restore Gold and Other Assets Stolen or Hidden by Germany during World War II.
Drinan, Jon. 1978. Logic and Society—Contradictions and Possible Worlds. Wiley, New York.
Erskine, Toni. 2001. “Assigning Responsibilities to Institutional Moral Agents: The Case of States and Quasi-States,” Ethics and International Affairs, 15, 2: 67–86.
Evans, Richard. 2002. “History, Memory, and the Law: The Historian as Expert Witness,” History and Theory, 41, 3: 326–345.
Fay, Brian. 2002. “Unconventional History,” History and Theory, 41, 4: 1–6.
Fearon, James. 1991. “Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science,” World Politics, 43 (January): 169–195.
Feliciano, Hector. 1997. The Lost Museum: The Nazi Conspiracy to Steal the World’s Greatest Works of Art. Basic Books, New York.
Ferguson, Niall (ed.). 1997. Virtual History-Virtual History. Picador, London.
Fletcher, George. 2003. Romantics at War Glory and Guilt in the Age of Terrorism. Princeton University Press.
Foucault, Michel. 1994. Dits et Écrits, Paris: Gallimard, vol. 3.
Frank, Richard. 1999. Downfall—The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. Random House, New York.
French, Peter. 1972. Individual and Collective Responsibility—Massacre at My Lai. Shenkman Publishing, Cambridge.
French, Peter. 1984. Collective and Corporate Responsibility. Columbia University Press, New York.
Grotius, Hugo. 1999. Le droit de la guerre et de la paix. Paris: PUF.
Jervis, Robert. 1970. The Logic of Images in International Relations. Princeton University Press.
Keck, Margeret and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists beyond Borders. Cornell University Press.
Levy, Richard H. 1996. “The Bombing of Auschwitz Revisited: A Critical Analysis,” Holocaust and Genocide Studies, (Winter): 267–298.
McCall, Jay. 2000. “States’ Rights and Foreign Policy, Some Things Should be Left to Washington,” Foreign Affairs, 79, 1.
Nadelman, Ethan. 1990. “Global Prohibition Regimes,” International Organization 44, 4: 479–526.
Neufeld, Michael J. and Michael Berenbaum (eds.). 2000. The Bombing of Auschwitz: Should the Allies Have Attempted It? St. Martin’s Press, New York.
Niall, Ferguson. 1998. The Pity of War. Penguin, London.
Noiriel, Gérard. 1996. Sur la “crise” de l’histoire, Berlin, Paris.
Nye, Joseph. 1992. Bound to Lead. Basic Books, New York.
Nye, Joseph. 2002. The Paradox of American Power, Oxford University Press, New York.
Power, Samantha. 2002. “A Problem from Hell”: America in the Age of Genocide. Basic Books, New York.
Rose, Neal and James Olson (eds.). 1995. What Might Have Been: The Social Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
Rosenau, James. 1990. Turbulence in World Politics. Princeton University Press.
Rosenfeld, Gavriel. 2002. “Why Do We Ask ‘What If?’ Reflections on the Function of Alternate History,” History and Society, 41, 4: 90–103.
Rousso, Henri. 1988. La hantise du passé: entretien avec Philippe Petit. Textuel, Paris.
Rubinstein, William D. 1997. The Myth of Rescue—Why the Democracies Could not Have Saved More Jews from the Nazis. Routledge, London.
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2000. “Plaintiff’s Diplomacy,” Foreign Affairs, 79, 5.
Strange, Susan. 1988. States and Markets. Pinter, London.
Teitel, Ruti. 2000. Transitional Justice. Oxford University Press, New York.
Terzi, Cédric. 2003. “La construction et l’expérience des problèmes publics l’exemple de la question des ‘fonds en déshérence’,” in Claudia Barril (dir.). Les formes d’espaces publics. Paris, L’Harmattan, 2003, forthcoming.
Tetlock, Philip and Aaron Belkin. (eds.). 1996. Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics Logical, Methdological and Psychological Perspectives, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Turner, Mark. 2001. Cognitive Dimensions of Social Science. Oxford University Press, New York.
van Ham, Peter. 2001. “The Rise of Brand States,” Foreign Affairs, 80, 5: 2–6.
Weber, Max. 1949. “Objective Possibility and Adequate Causation in Historical Explanation,” in The Methodology of Social Sciences. Free Press, New York.
Wyman, David S. 1978. “Why Auschwitz Was Never Bombed,” Commentary, 16, 5: 37–46.
Wyman, David S. 1984. The Abandonment of the Jews. Pantheon Books, New York.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Colonomos, A. Unilateral jurisdiction: Universal jurisdiction à l’Américaine in the age of post-realist power. Hum Rights Rev 5, 22–47 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-004-1001-9
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-004-1001-9