Sovereignty: The Battle for the Hearts and Minds of Men

Product Information

The division of sovereignty can be vertical or horizontal, depending on whether it takes place among distinct political entities such as two States or between a State and the EU, or whether it takes place within a single political entity according to territorial or other federal divisions or according to distinct political functions. Differences in national power and interests, he concludes, not international norms, continue to be the most powerful explanation for the behavior of states.

The Sovereign - 1st Edition - Stephen Eric Bronner

These three key notions were gradually developed by the next generations of political theorists and in particular social contract theorists. Secondly, and this is as much a cause as a consequence, international law was conceived exclusively as a network of conventions and mutual promises whose source was State consent. The author looks at various issues areas to make his argument: minority rights, human rights, sovereign lending, and state creation in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.Published under the auspices of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law under the direction of Professor Anne Peters (2021–) and Professor Rüdiger Wolfrum (2004–2020). Equally, Tombs, like all Brexiters, expresses his contempt for the second referendum on the Lisbon treaty held in Ireland in 2009 after the first one was defeated. The original theoretical model of State sovereignty is often attributed to Jean Bodin and his Six Livres de la République published in 1576.

Sovereignty, and International Governance | Oxford State, Sovereignty, and International Governance | Oxford

This differentiated regime of sovereignty, whether one looks at it from a domestic or international law perspective, can be explained both by the differences between those two faces of sovereignty and their inherent connection as two faces of the same coin. The content of the threshold cannot but remain contestable and different paradigms have been used at different times in the history of the concept of sovereignty; it suffices to look at paradigms like immigration control or monetary policy to see that they have gradually given way to new ones, in the EU in particular, and hence to new thresholds of sovereignty. To understand how this internationalization of modern sovereignty finally came about, it is useful to distinguish two key developments: the internationalization of popular sovereignty, and the development of sovereignty beyond the State. This also implies that when they are both granted, neither of them can be given priority over the other. There is, moreover, an underlying tension in the idea of “the people” in an explicitly multinational state like the UK.Alongside conflicts of sovereignty among independent States, the necessity of developing international legal rules gradually emerged. Another valuable element of the collection is the repeated demonstration that the mining of Indigenous data by non-Indigenous nations is just the most recent example of colonial powers extracting resources from Indigenous People, communities, and nations.