Justifying Torture: Explaining Democratic States' Noncompliance with International Humanitarian Law

Autor/in	Kanstroom, Emily
Titel	Justifying Torture: Explaining Democratic States' Noncompliance with International Humanitarian Law
Quelle	In: Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 14 (2007), S.51-95 (45 Seiten) PDF als Volltext (1); PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei (2) Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1085-4568
Schlagwörter	United States History; Foreign Countries; Terrorism; War; Compliance (Legal); International Law; Government Role; Crime; International Cooperation; Social Values; Civil Rights; Institutionalized Persons; Study Abroad; Higher Education; Afghanistan; Algeria; France; Iraq + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Ausland; Terrorismus; Krieg; Law of nations; Völkerrecht; Crimes; Delict; Delicts; Delikt; Internationale Kooperation; Internationale Zusammenarbeit; Sozialer Wert; Bürgerrechte; Grundrechte; Zivilrecht; Studies abroad; Auslandsstudium; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Algerien; Frankreich; Irak
Abstract	On June 28, 1951, France ratified the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which prohibited the torture of prisoners of war. On August 2, 1955, the United States of America ratified the same document. Between 1954 and 1962, France fought a war against Algeria, which sought its independence from colonial rule. From September 11, 2001 until the present, the United States has been engaged in what its government has termed "The Global War on Terror," which has involved wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and holding detainees for interrogation at Guantanamo Bay. Although the two cases must be distinguished from one another based on different situational, ideological, and historical characteristics, there are critical commonalities. This study focuses on two distinct research questions: first, what explains the rationale by which France and the United States, two democratic states, violated international and domestic law by torturing prisoners of war? Second, how did these two states justify this noncompliance? This article engages the question of how international humanitarian law (IHL) operates or fails to operate in constraining state actors. This article illuminates some of the challenges IHL faces today in ensuring state compliance. (Contains 119 notes.) (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Frontiers Journal. Dickinson College P.O. Box 1773, Carlisle, PA 17013. Tel: 717-254-8858; Fax: 717-245-1677; Web site: http://www.frontiersjournal.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10