RESUMO Este artigo examina as transformações das regras internacionais sobre violência a partir de uma perspectiva construtivista de Relações Internacionais. Em particular, analisam-se as mudanças nas práticas sociais internacionais que têm ocorrido desde o fim do último século, discutindo-as em termos de regras internacionais que concomitantemente limitam e constituem as condições de possibilidade para o uso da violência. Na primeira parte, são mapeados e brevemente examinados cinco conjuntos de regras internacionais sobre violência: o direito internacional humanitário, o humanitarismo, o direito internacional dos direitos humanos, o direito internacional criminal e o regime de segurança coletiva. Na segunda parte, analisam-se as transformações político-normativa-sociais e conceituais que vêm ocorrendo na ordem mundial desde a década de 1990, dando particular ênfase à redefinição do conceito de segurança, à ressignificação do conceito de soberania e ao processo de expansão e confluência daqueles cinco conjuntos de regras internacionais. Argumenta-se que tais transformações das regras internacionais sobre violência, de um lado, expressam o deslocamento do dualismo doméstico/internacional e, de outro lado, ratificam o novo lugar do indivíduo nas relações internacionais. Com isso, sugere-se que é possível identificar mudanças significativas na arquitetura constitucional da ordem mundial contemporânea.
In this article, I offer a reading of the pirate in Carl Schmitt inspired by Reinhart Koselleck’s study on asymmetric counterconcepts. I argue that the pirate in Schmitt marks a negative asymmetric counterconceptual position associated with a space of exception in relation to which one may also identify the outlaw enemy of humanity. In displacing the political and mapping the pirate’s position within Schmitt’s conceptual order, the significance of this article’s main contribution is to draw attention to a specific asymmetric counterconceptual structuring that marks the limits of ‘our’ international political world with the dehumanized negativity of its constitutive outsider. Rereading Koselleck’s methodological qualification on the structural iterability of asymmetric counterconcepts, the article suggests that the spectre of the pirate lives on, haunting the outer limits of the international and legitimizing abject forms of violence.
This article investigates sovereign (in)equality as a phenomenon that is manifested in thedifferent levels of international institutions. The analysis is developed from the process againstOmar Al Bashir, Sudan’s President-in-Office, at the International Criminal Court. Consideringthat norms and rules have a social role in the multiple relations existing between agents andstructures, that is, they transform relations in the international system, the article investigates the dispositions and principles present within the scope of the International Criminal Courtthat authorize a discrimination between States. This distinction implies the imposition ofinternational rules for some actors and the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogativesfor others. More specifically, international criminal justice is characterized by selectivityin judgments, as some countries are given certain authority over the regime. In this sense,it is argued that the sovereign (in)equality that is present in international criminal law issimultaneously a manifestation and condition of possibility for the hierarchy in the social,and therefore institutional normative, and political architecture of the international system.It is argued that the presence of this sovereign (in)equality can be identified at the differentlevels of the institutions of international society, insofar as they influence one another.
This article investigates sovereign (in)equality as a phenomenon that is manifested in the different levels of international institutions. The analysis is developed from the process against Omar Al Bashir, Sudan's President-in-Office, at the International Criminal Court. Considering that norms and rules have a social role in the multiple relations existing between agents and structures, that is, they transform relations in the international system, the article investigates the dispositions and principles present within the scope of the International Criminal Court that authorize a discrimination between States. This distinction implies the imposition of international rules for some actors and the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogatives for others. More specifically, international criminal justice is characterized by selectivity in judgments, as some countries are given certain authority over the regime. In this sense, it is argued that the sovereign (in)equality that is present in international criminal law is simultaneously a manifestation and condition of possibility for the hierarchy in the social, and therefore institutional normative, and political architecture of the international system.
In this article, I offer a displacement of Carl Schmitt’s metaphysical image of a specific epoch and the way it forges a particular construction of the planet, which reveals architectonic traces of a normative framing which authorizes and legitimizes, a specific way of conceiving the appropriate form of the political organization of the world. Inspired by Jacques Derrida’s work, I displace Schmitt’s traditional friend/enemy dualism towards the sea and the conceptual (post) structural limit-position of the pirate. Adopting a Derridean, deconstructionist strategy, I question the way Schmitt conceptually (self-) authorizes his conceptual order (and ordering), identifying some spaces, actions, and categories of subjects as unpolitical . Negatively, I argue, these non- political constructions, these constitutive outsiders , conceptually authorize the line which enables the conditions for conceptualizing and identifying the political. In reading Schmitt from the sea, I invite the reader to reimagine the boundaries of our cartographical political imagination, the limits of our normative conceptual language, and the ways in which the legitimation of exceptional forms of violence may be conceptually articulated, authorized, and legitimized.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.