Banning the bomb : the politics of norm creation

On July 8, 1996, the International Court of Justice pronounced that the threat or use of nuclear weapons was “generally illegal.” The Court’s formal invocation of the language of “illegality” on a subject that was hitherto treated as largely within the realm of sovereign national discretion by the major nuclear powers marked a historic departure from the past delving into the genesis, proceedings and outcome of the advisory process. Banning the Bomb: The Politics of Norm Creation participates in the ongoing debate on international norm creation between Realists and Constructivists in international relations scholarship. The author argues from a Constructivist provenance that it is critical to examine the role of international non-state coalitions in order to appreciate the broader political context. Well researched and rich in detail, this book will be a valuable resource for scholars and students of international relations, disarmament, and peace studies.** Cover Banning the Bomb The Politics of Norm Creation Copyright Contents Foreword by B.S. Chimni Acknowledgements List of Abbreviations Introduction Testraining the Use of Force in International Relations Genesis of the July Opinion The United Nations General Assembly Request Theoretical Concerns in the Context of the July Opinion Legalization Of Norms In International Politics Organization of the Book The Politics of Norm Creation: The Engagement of States and Non-state Actors The World Court’s Lineage The Pcij and The Icj The Evolution of the Advisory Jurisdiction Non-State Actor Initiatives The WHO Request and Critiques of the Court’s Response State Submissions in Response to the Court’s Invitation Conclusion Individual Responses to the World Court’s Majority Opinion The Majority Opinion The Uniqueness of Nuclear Weapons Human Rights Law Genocide Environmental Law Humanitarian Law Self-Defense and Deterrence Individual Response to the Court’s Majority Opinion Declarations Appended to the July Opinion Separate Opinions in Response to the July Outcome Notes of Dissent in Response to the July Opinion Conclusion The Dissent of Judge Weeramantry The Cosmology of Weeramantry: a Framework for International Law Weeramantry’s Engagement with the Nuclear Issue Weeramantry’s Critique of the Majority Opinion Affirming the Multicultural Basis of International Law An Epistemic Critique The Problem of Culpability Contesting Received Histories Re-Affirming Equality As The Basis Of International Law Conclusion International Relations Theory and the July 1996 Opinion Legal Assessments Prior to the July 1996 Opinion Academic Responses to the July 1996 Opinion The Neo-Realist Response to the July Opinion The Constructivist Response Conclusion Conclusion Appendix International Court of Justice Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion Bibliography Index About the Author