ASIL
American Society of International Law
Newsletter
ISSUE #43: January 2012
<http://www.asil.org/un21>
UN21 Interest Group
formerly
United Nations Decade of International Law
Contact Information:
2223 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20008-2864
Chair:
Itzchak E. Kornfeld, Esquire
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Mt. Scopus, Israel
• e-mail: itzchak.kornfeld@gmail.com
Vice Chair: Martha Trofimenko, Barrister and Solicitor
Wilmington, DE, USA
• e-mail: trofimenko@mail.dol.net
Editor: William Slomanson
Thomas Jefferson School of Law
• e-mail: bills@tjsl.edu
• telephone: (619) 961-4309
ASIL Admin:
Elizabeth Andersen Exec. Dir. ASIL
• e-mail: eandersen@asil.org
• telephone: (202) 939-6000
• facsimile: (202) 797-7133
MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR:
CHCHAIRDITOR:
Dear colleagues:
IN THIS ISSUE
(#43—Jan. 2012):
• Message from the Chair
• Message from the Editor
• UN Decade Objectives
• Op-ed: “Jerusalem, Israel?”
• Reader’s Corner
• Your Turn
This may be my last “Message from the Chair”, as we will shortly hold elections and I will step down as the Chair
of the UN21 IG. With this forecast in mind, I’d like to share some thoughts about the role of the United Nations,
among other issues.
However, I must first concede that I have been privileged to chair our IG over the past few years. One has
had the pleasure of meeting our remarkable members, and making friendships that I am sure will endure. Ladies and
Gentlemen, we have in our ranks academics, some of whom are leaders in their fields of study, from across the
globe, ambassadors, consular legal staff, legal officers at the U.N. and at tribunals, a QC or two, numerous students,
and up and coming stars of international law, whether in private practice or otherwise. A group of nicer and collegial
colleagues you will not meet.
Indeed, being a nominal member of the ASIL leadership, I am compelled to confess that we are part not
only of a remarkable IG, but also of an impressive Society - one that is imbued with a rich history and leaders that I
my humble opinion are unmatched. One of those leaders is my mentor, Bill Slomanson, a founder of the IG.
Thankfully, he has been there to guide me over and across the rough waters that I have faced when I took over the
reins of our IG, and has remained the steadfast editor of our IG’s newsletter. Thank you, Bill.
But for Bill, my time as chair would have been more difficult and I certainly would have been the poorer as
I escorted our IG over the past six years. I will offer more thanks later. Nevertheless, I feel compelled at this
juncture to declare that I owe a special note of thanks to the following people, who in one way or another enhanced
my tenure and make our IG such a wonderful cluster of like-minded people: Ambassador Hans Corell, Simon
Chesterman, Lilian del Castillo-Labord, Mary Fan, Noemi Gal-Or, Djurdia Lazic, Verlee Prybyloski, Kilaparti
Ramakrishna, Marie Soveroski, and Ralph Wilde. Now, onto another topic.
In October of last year I was fortunate to attend the International Law Weekend in New York, which our
Society co-sponsored. The plenary session, on Thursday evening, included a number of the Society’s luminaries:
Past President, José Enrique Alvarez, Dean Christopher Borgen, Kate Gorove (U.S. Dept. of State Office of Legal
Counsel), and Sean Murphy (newly elected U.S. Representative to the ILC), who addressed the topic “Is
Sovereignty Dead?” As you know, Art. 2 of the U.N. Charter addresses the issue of sovereign States, as members.
My primary interest in that article was what I will call the “equal footing” paradigm that is the “sovereign equality”
of all member states. While each of the speakers made their presentations, I got to thinking that although the text of
Art. 2 asserts the term equality, some States are more equal than others. For example, The P-5 are certainly more
equal in power at the U.N., than let’s say Malawi, or the recently created South Sudan. And, of course the United
States is probably more powerful that the other P-4.
The U.N. leadership and membership have to navigate through these cordons of power. Indeed, given the
number of international organizations that the United Nations has spawned over its 67 years of existence, e.g., the
ICJ, UNICEF, UNEP, WHO, ILC, etc., the organization does a great deal more for humanity than is apparent on a
day to day basis. Of course, with so many bodies there is always room for mistakes and for complaints.
Simply stated, the U.N. is as perfect as people are, i.e., rather imperfect. For example, one action that the
organization undertook in 2001 is the Millennium Development Goals. 1 When the Goals were first announced, I
scoffed at them, as being plainly unrealistic. I also wondered to myself: how did the fashioners of the MDGs think
that they would be able to push the governments of the Least Developed Nations—the poorest in the world—to
provide potable water to 2.4 billion peoples within a decade? See e.g., Target 7C: “Halve, by 2015, the proportion
of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.” Having worked in Africa
the challenge alone seemed like some folly that a politician pulled out of thin air.
However, by 2005 or 2006 I began to rethink my skepticism. It dawned on me that if we don’t try nothing
will be accomplished. And then it hit me: that is the real power of people. People who try to make a difference, a
change, for the better in the world they live in. There is always room for cynicism, apathy, pessimism and ridicule.
Not only is there always room for it, it is always there as a pall.
I am the child of Holocaust survivors. And as children of that ilk are want to do I have asked myself more
often that I care to admit, could I survive under the conditions that my parents face in the concentration camps:
knowing that they lost their families – my mother lost 98 uncles, aunts, and first cousins, for example, and she was
The Millennium Development Goals (“MDGs”) are eight international development goals that 193 United
Nations member states, and some 23 international organizations, agreed upon beginning in the year 2001, to achieve
by the year 2015. They include reducing, by half, the number of people who do not have access to potable water or
sanitation, eradicating extreme poverty, and “6.A. have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of
HIV/AIDS.” See generally, <http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals>.
1
separated from her younger brother by Dr. Mengle at the gate to Birkenau, the camp attached to Auschwitz? I
would be devastated, and thus wonder how they retained hope in the darkness of hopelessness; how did they survive
the physical labor and the lack of food. I certainly don’t know if I would survive under those conditions. But, they
did. And they normalized their lives, just like those who survived the butchering of the millions of Cambodians by
the Khmer Rouge, or the survivors of the million that were hacked to death in Rwanda, the woman raped by the
Janjaweed in Darfur, and the survivors of brutal dictatorships, e.g., today’s Syria and North Korea, among others.
They all, each survivor in her or his way, march on to remake their lives, and as best as they can.
That is the greatness of humanity and ergo the U.N. We survive the macro to make a difference in the
micro, and we slog and progress onward. Each of you has a mission in life. You may not yet know what it is, or
you may be lucky enough to have previously uncovered it. We—each of us—has been provided with talents and
tools that are unique to us and to us alone. Please use them, or use them more, whether you are at the beginning of
your career or near its end. Go out into the world, whether it is your neighborhood, your country, or some other
place, and do good with what you have. That gift can change the world, if we allow ourselves. Help our new IG’s
leadership, help the ASIL, help spread your knowledge to the ignorant. And, they are in the billions. Each, with his
or her own opinion about what international law and relations are or should be, even if they are dead wrong. Tell
them before they tell you. Nip that ignorance in the bud!
I now close. But as I noted above I have some other people to thank. I have been fortunate to lead our IG
across the tenure of four of the Society’s presidents, each of whom has in his or her own way, through their lack of
hubris, good cheer and veritable font of knowledge, helped me to grow. They are in reverse order, David Caron,
Lucy Reed, José Alvarez and Jim Carter. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Director of Communications and
Membership, Sheila Ward, to Veronica Onorevole, Executive Office and Programs Manager, and to Jimmy Steiner
Web and IT Support for their assistance; and to the two Executive Directors that I have had the good fortune to work
with, also in reverse order, Betsy Anderson and Charlotte Ku.
Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to the three members of the ASIL’s 2011 IG Committee, Greg
Shaffer, Chair, Janie Chuang, and Susan Karamanian, for giving our IG another lease on life. Well, now I'm off to
philosophize and write two books. Send coffee, and sanity, if you have some to spare!
Ciao, and looking forward to seeing you soon,
Itzchak
MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR:
CHCHAIRDITOR:
We have completed the task of transferring the section’s website from Cornell Law School to ASIL.
Because of the comparative inaccessibility of our website to non-members, there is now a mirror site which
effectively continues the “Cornell” appearance of our richly adorned newsletter website. That way, section members
can more quickly access back issues, by bookmarking the following webpage. Non-members may also access them,
as well. Go to: <http://www.asil.org/un21>.
The section especially thanks ASIL webmaster, Jimmy Steiner. He is responsible for converting our Wordbased newsletter into the html format appearing on our Newsletter webpage. He thus makes us shine on the above
webpage!
With the arrival of Newsletter #43, our news letter is now in its 20 th year!
UN DECADE OBJECTIVES:
The following is the original (and current) section mission statement, which we decided
to include in each issue:*
• Promoting acceptance of the substantive principles of International Law;
• Promoting peaceful settlement of disputes, including greater use of the
International Court of Justice (ICJ);
• Encouraging progressive development of International Law and its
codification;
• Encouraging the teaching, study, dissemination, and wider acceptance of
International Law.
* Thanks to UN21 member and staunch supporter, Howard Meyer (NYC), for making the
proposal that this listing be mentioned in each issue of our Newsletter. The members present at
an annual business meeting of UN21 adopted at our 1995 Business Meeting in New York, on the
occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations. Since then, I have included it in each
issue of our UN21 Newsletter.
Notice: This prominent feature of every Newsletter was the subject of an attempted revision.
While several revisions were suggested, forwarded via Newsletter and e-mail attachments, the
former Chair (me) was not charismatic enough to convince members to respond and participate
in altering our already quite serviceable statement of purpose. So it is not my intent to push
further on this project, unless another UN21 member decides to renew interest in this project—
i.e., via e-mails via our group listserv at <ASIL_UN21IG@lists.asil.org>.
OP-ED:
“Jerusalem, Israel?”
William R. Slomanson
Ari Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem. He is a United States citizen by virtue of his
parents’ citizenship. Ari’s parents applied for a United States passport and a Consular Report of
Birth for Ari at the United States embassy in Tel Aviv. They unsuccessfully requested that both
documents record their son’s place of birth as “Jerusalem, Israel.” State Department policy
permits the recording of “Jerusalem.” But it prohibits the addition of “Israel,” because that entry
would result in “Jerusalem, Israel” appearing on these government-issued documents. The
United States has never articulated an official view on the unsettling issue of whether Jerusalem
is a part of Israel. Its unwavering neutrality on Jerusalem’s status has been a central feature of
American policy since Israel achieved statehood.
Congress enacted the United States Policy with Respect to Jerusalem as the Capital of
Israel Act in 2002, the year of Ari’s birth. Its members directly challenged presidential neutrality
on the status of Jerusalem. For requests like the Zivitofsky’s, Congress demanded that the State
Department record the place of birth as “Jerusalem, Israel.” Congress also urged President
George W. Bush to relocate the United States embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem—an act
which House Speaker Newt Gingrich then characterized as an overdue recognition of Israel’s de
facto sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.
Adding to the confusion, President Bush signed this veto-proof bill into law, although his
signing statement characterized the legislation as being merely advisory. Bush therein cautioned
that this congressional demand on the executive branch impermissibly interfered with the
president’s power to remain neutral on the issue of Jerusalem’s status. Bush emphasized that the
Jerusalem as Capital of Israel legislation did not change the six-decade, hands off policy of the
United States. He claimed that this recognition issue is governed by the Constitution—and that
the express presidential power to recognize foreign governments impliedly resolves whether he
must recognize Jerusalem as being within Israel, and whether it is Israel’s capital.
Ari’s parents dragged the judicial branch into the fray. They sued Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, seeking a court order requiring Clinton to comply with the Jerusalem as Capital
of Israel legislation. The lower federal courts dismissed the Zivitofsky complaint on various
grounds, such as the judicial branch not possessing the power to involve itself in recognition
matters committed to the executive branch by the United States Constitution. Another
justification for dismissal was that such disputes are committed to the political branches of the
government, rather than the judicial branch. The Supreme Court recently decided to review the
opposing legislative-executive positions, given that Clinton was not complying with the
congressional directive to list Ari’s place of birth as “Jerusalem, Israel.” The Court will consider
this incredibly sensitive issue during its new term commencing in October.
The Jerusalem as Capital of Israel legislation spawned intense criticism abroad. That no
nation maintains an embassy in Jerusalem (as opposed to consulates) suggests the scale of
international opposition to this legislation. Palestinians especially resented the anything but
neutral congressional embrace of Israel’s sovereignty over all of Jerusalem. When Israel annexed
all of Jerusalem in 1980, the United Nations General Assembly resolved that this was an illegal
assumption of sovereignty over the entire city. About 100 nations have recognized Palestine,
often in varying degrees short of de jure statehood. Further support for the Palestinian position
will likely surface in the United Nations General Assembly in New York City in September. The
Palestinian Authority has announced its intent to then declare de facto statehood. Israel threatens
to respond by also annexing the West Bank as sovereign Israeli territory. Palestinians could oneup Israel by claiming to secede from their new mother state.
The Jerusalem as Capital of Israel legislation has placed the president in a more
vulnerable position. Congress tainted the United States’ position as an honest broker in this eversensitive Middle East conflict. It provided legislative cannon fodder for the emergent perception
that the United States—Israel’s number one ally—intends to debunk the “Jerusalem, Israel”
neutrality policy adopted by every president since Harry Truman. Each of them has unfortunately
been sidetracked by major domestic or international distractions, thus marginalizing the
sustained focus necessary to end this key Arab-Israeli conflict. The Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital
legislation added to the distractions that Presidents Bush and Obama have encountered, while
pursuing an integrated United States approach to the Middle East conundrum.
One hopes that the U.S. Supreme Court will neutralize the above “Jerusalem, Israel”
legislation by rejecting the Zivotofsky case against the State Department. This case will be
uniquely politicized, assuming Palestine decides to go forward with its September statehood
declaration. That turn of events will occur not long before the Supreme Court rules on the
Zivotofsky governmental balance of power issue. In any event, Ari’s claim is premised upon an
unwarranted congressional intrusion into the presidential executive power to recognize foreign
entities. That governmental power will hopefully be characterized as falling within the sole
province of the executive branch of our government. We cannot afford to speak with multiple
voices in such critical affairs of state.
READER’S CORNER:
cCORNERCORNER:
Courts
Economics
Environmental Law
Humanitarian Law
Human Rights
Organizations
Religion
Statehood
Treaty Law
Publishers Info
Format: Book titles are listed alphabetically, rather than via the conventional alphabetical
listing by author. The number contained with the “[ ]” provides the number of book pages.
The number appearing at the end of each entry is the book’s ISBN. Price: EUR = Euro; GBP =
British Pounds; and USD = US Dollars.
A “•” bullet signals an unsolicited book that was received, not reviewed because of time/space
restraints, but definitely worthy of mention. (We rarely review unsolicited book submissions.)
Courts
Bert Swart, Alexander Zahar, and Göran Sluiter (ed.), THE LEGACY OF THE INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA (Oxford: 2011) [550]. ISBN: 978-01995-7341-7 Price: $180.00 USD.
This collection contains seventeen individually-authored essays. Each reflects on the
impact of the ICTY on international criminal jurisprudence.
The five parts begin with the chapters in: I. A Distant Court. Its fresh perspectives assess
the ICTY’s role in striking the balance between local and international prosecutorial options. Part
II. Process and Rights: Three Views analyzes the court’s international criminal procedure,
lessons learned, and the comparison between the ICTY and the ECHR. Part III: Battlefields
focuses first on unity and division among the justices in their opinion writing. It then addresses
specifics regarding the crimes of persecution and genocide, excuses, regulating defense counsel,
and sentencing. Part IV: Improvisation and Discovery neatly culls the literature and diverse
perspectives on self-representation, command responsibility, a wide range of issues regarding
agreements between the parties to a conflict, and proportional sentencing. The final Part V.
Legacy in Bricks and Mortar covers the mechanisms for ending the work of the ICTY.
This collection is especially timely, given the anticipated completion of ICTY trials in
2012. Its contents provide unique insights about this test tube for international criminal
jurisprudence. Its authors and editors have done a splendid job of capturing the letter and the
spirit of this ad hoc court’s interim handling of the major International Criminal Law
developments—drawing from the work of the Nuremberg Tribunal, to positively influence that
of the permanent International Criminal Court.
Economics
• Eric A. Posner (ed.), ECONOMICS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (Elgar: 2010) [634].
ISBN: 978-1-8454-2708-5 Price: $330.00 USD.
Environmental Law
Ulrich Beyerlin and Thilo Marauhn, INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (Hart Publishing
Ltd: 2011) [452]. ISBN: 978-1-8411-3924-1 Price: $64.00 USD.
This book is a valuable primer on International Environmental Law (IEL). It is written by
Max Plank and University of GieBen University authorities in the field, as their contribution to
the 2012 Rio+20 UN sustainable development dialogue.
Its seven compartments cover this discipline in a succinct but authoritative fashion. The
Part I Historical Development provides excellent background for the analyses which follow
(Stockholm. Rio, Johannesburg, Copenhagen). Part II Key Concepts in International
Environmental Law covers the essentials in a digestible and convincing way—providing
footnote and bibliographic resources for readily accessing the broader corpus of this body of law.
Part III Key Issues in Current International Environmental Law adds fresh perspectives on the
essential issues confronting all contemporary decision-makers. Parts IV and V, International
Environmental Governance I and II: “Setting the Rules of the Game” & Ensuring Compliance,
feature the substantive and procedural aspects of the day-to-day, not-so-academic problems that
all shareholders face. These include textual sections illustrating policy, regime-building,
regulatory approaches, standard-setting, and dispute settlement mechanisms. Part VI
Relationship between International Environmental Law and Other Areas of International Law
injects the glue that bonds the interlocking features of the respective subject matters. The authors
therein facilitate the dialogue between IEL and human rights, national security, economics
(especially WT), and international finance. The Part VII Perspectives segment of the textbook
offers critical insights to the overarching dilemmas lying at the heart of today’s IEL issues (e.g.,
deficiencies in co-operation, North-South dichotomy, and effectuating treaty compliance).
Professors and decision-makers in search of a concise restatement of IEL, containing the
essentials necessary to quickly grasp an intelligent overview, need look no further!
Humanitarian Law
Francesco Francioni and Natalino Ronzitti (ed.), WAR BY CONTRACT: HUMAN RIGHTS,
HUMANITARIAN LAW AND PRIVATE CONTRACTORS (Oxford: 2011) [532]. IBSN: 978-0-19960455-5 Price: $160.00 USD.
This collection of essays, edited by preeminent scholars in the field, addresses all salient
features of the huge problem with private military contractors. Can anyone be surprised that
President Karzai wants to ban them?
The five parts of this collection begins with Part I Security and Policy Perspectives. The
essays therein cover both land and sea-based (controlling piracy) questions. Part II Human
Rights analyzes various facets of what is occurring on the ground; e.g., human rights norms
associated with EU expectations/adjudication, home state compliance, and hiring State
obligations. Part III, International Humanitarian Law, offers a half-dozen chapters covering the
pre-existing and fresh contours of this problem as it affects various groups; e.g., accompanying
military forces, and on-scene women and children. Part IV Accountability and Responsibility of
Private Contractors yields an intriguing exposé on the business, self-regulation, and State
responsibility cogs of this tarnished wheel. Past V Criminal and Civil Liability of Private
Military and Security Companies and Their Employees closes out this riveting assessment of
what has appeared to replace the Wild West of the early Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Readers seeking a comprehensive analysis of this feature of the intersection of human
rights and humanitarian law will be quite pleased with the diverse perspectives available in this
handy collection of unparalleled expertise.
Alexander Gillespie, A HISTORY OF THE LAWS OF WAR: VOLUME 1 THE CUSTOMS AND LAWS OF
WAR WITH REGARDS TO COMBATANTS AND CAPTIVES (Hart: 2011) [264]. ISBN: 978-1-84946204-4 Price: $90.00 USD.
VOLUME 2 THE CUSTOMS AND LAWS OF WAR WITH REGARDS TO CIVILIANS IN TIMES OF
CONFLICT (Hart: 2011) [311]. ISBN: 978-1-8494-6205-1 Price: $90.00 USD.
VOLUME 3 THE CUSTOMS AND LAWS OF WAR WITH REGARDS TO ARMS CONTROL (Hart:
2011) [168]. ISBN: 978-1-8494-6206-8 Price: $90.00 USD.
This multi-volume treatment is a comprehensive restatement of the Laws of War (LOW).
It covers the laws on combatants from time immemorial to the present day. The first volume
vividly presents the treatment of captives, from the time of the Greeks, through the present day—
with special emphasis on the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its 1977 Protocols.
The second volume covers the laws on civilian targeting, starving civilians as a war
tactic, and an occupying army’s treatment of civilian property.
The third volume in this series covers the laws on arms control. It focuses on
conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction.
One could argue that the author could have covered these materials in one larger text. On
the other hand, the degree of interest spawned by contemporary warfare—for example, multiple
and nuanced courses and discourses on these three sides of a LOW conceptual triangle arguably
militate in favor of discrete volumes (each being less expensive than having to purchase all
three). Regardless of the packaging, libraries and professors who focus on the many elements of
the LOW would be wise to have all three volumes at hand. Together, they provide a vivid,
detailed, and especially readable account of the LOW. This set is destined to be described by all
holders as a richly adorned, and affordable, research treasure trove.
Organizations
August Reinisch (ed.), CHALLENGING ACTS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS BEFORE
NATIONAL COURTS (Oxford: 2010) [302]. ISBN: 978-0-1995-9529-7 Price: $140.00 USD.
This cohort of intriguing articles analyses the interaction between international
organizations (IOs) and national courts. For example, what happens when a national court wants
to overrule the decision of an IO? In what instances can an international decision trump national
law? Can a nation legitimately challenge the decision of an international criminal court? Can an
individual or entity undo being blacklisted by the UN Security Council?
The eleven essays in this book (including the editor’s introduction and conclusion)
embrace a wide selection of IOs. They track the practice involving entities such as the European
Court of Justice, the United Nations, Interpol, and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries.
There has been a cosmic augmentation of interest in cases (e.g., the ECHR’s Kadi &
Barakaat decisions), and literature—focusing on the interconnection of States and organizations
seeking to flex their respective governmental powers over the same subject matter. One hoping
to tap into a rich vein of literature on point would be wise to obtain, and digest, this succinct but
authoritative collection of stellar accounts of the essentials.
Religion
Rex Ahdar and Nicholas Aroney (ed.), SHARI’A IN THE WEST (Oxford: 2010) [336]. ISBN: 9780-1995-8291-4 Price: $40.00 USD.
This collection consists of sixteen essays, and two recent lectures (appendixes) on
whether Shari-a Law can be accommodated by western legal systems. Its western legal scholars
enjoy reputations for having the foremost expertise on this incredibly sensitive and nuanced
subject.
The opening Topography essay sets the tone for this scholarly, but refreshingly vivid,
account of new pathways for policy makers, governmental institutions, and teacher-scholars.
Anyone in search of a rich vein of analytical literature, on politically charged subject matter,
need explore no further.
Shari’a’s essays cover the spectrum of sub-issues with an almost surprising
comprehensiveness. Reviewing and reporting on the highlights from this luminary volume is not
an easy task—and admittedly far more subjective than the objective work product conveniently
collated between two covers. These include: the Shari’a controversy as articulated in
British/Indonesian/Australian/Netherlands discourse; recognition of religious court dispositions;
the degree of pluralism in societies linked with Islam; societal accommodation of the Shari’a
code of beliefs; the interplay of Shari’a law, natural law, and democracy.
Statehood
James Summers (ed.), KOSOVO: A PRECEDENT?: THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, THE
ADVISORY OPINION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR STATEHOOD, SELF DETERMINATION AND
MINORITY RIGHTS (Martinus Nijhoff: 2011) [455]. ISBN: 978-9-0041-7599-0. Price: $212.00
USD.
This collection of fourteen essays analyzes Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of
independence, how that action affected the concepts of self-determination and minority rights,
and the implications for other territories whose populace remains in search of self-determination.
The editor has astutely organized the work product of this cohort of leading scholars, most of
whom are British (and one each from Pristina and Belgrade Universities).
The part 1 Introduction offers the editor’s comprehensive, and vividly portrayed,
introduction. It covers Kosovo from its status as a Yugoslavian province through independence.
Part 2 Kosovo’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence (2008) contains four analyses on the
related features of International Law, degree sovereignty lost and gained, self-determination, and
recognition. Part 3 Kosovo and Self-Determination and Minority Rights covers various preindependence contexts (e.g., post-World War II self-determination, intervention, Badinter
Commission, International Court of Justice opinion). The essays in part 4 Implications of
Kosovo as a Precedent for Other Regions focuses on Kosovo’s implications for other semiautonomous regions, including Georgia and the Basque Country. (Note that the ETA disavowed
its separatist aspirations while this book was in production.)
Scholars, international decision-makers, and governmental operatives should explore this
rich vein of practical nuggets. In an arena otherwise laden with sub-surface political animus, this
addition to the literature should be lodged in any library or personal collection focusing on
secession, self-determination, and a better understanding of what the Kosovo conflict has to offer
for contemporary secession discourse.
Treaty Law
Enzo Cannizzaro (ed.), THE LAW OF TREATIES BEYOND THE VIENNA CONVENTION (Oxford:
2011) [464]. ISBN: 978-0-1995-8891-6 Price: $180.00 USD.
The two dozen essays in this collection offer fresh perspectives on the connection
between the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and Customary International Law. One
of the many values of this comprehensive work product is the editor and his cohort not shying
away from the controversial issues with pre-existing law, treaty applications, and those situations
not clearly defined by post-treaty State practice.
The analyses are astutely divided into five parts. The part I Conclusion of Treaties offers
unique insights into extraordinary matters such as agreements between states and non-State
entities; State practice that pushes the envelope regarding the obligation to refrain from activities
contrary to the purpose of an agreement; objections to reservations; and impermissible
reservations to human rights treaties. The essays in part II Interpretation of Treaties address rules
of interpretation, and subsequent practice focusing on WTO issues. Part III Observance and
Application of Treaties, includes assessments of the role of international organizations as third
parties (e.g., UN Security Council and European courts). Part IV Invalidity and Termination of
Treaties explores contemporary niches such as coercion; absolute invalidity; treaty obsolescence;
and termination. Part V Jus Cogens Beyond the Vienna Convention covers developments
regarding the current status of jus cogens, and distinctions between it and erga omnes.
Teachers, researchers, and librarians will readily savor this valuable assortment of fresh
VCLT content—poured into a vintage treaty application bottle.
Publishers Information
Elgar: Edward Elgar Publishing, The Lypiatts, 15 Lansdown Road, Cheltenham Glos GL50 2JA,
UK.
Hart: Hart Publishing, 16C Worchester Place, Oxford OX1 2JW, ENGLAND.
Martinus Nijhoff: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Brill, P.O. Box 9000, 2300 PA Leiden,
NETHERLANDS.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001 Evans Road, Cary, NC 27513, USA.
YOUR TURN
This is your opportunity to contact us regarding any questions/comments you may have.
Please see the contact information for the individuals listed at the outset of this Newsletter.