Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been confused about this for a very long time. Who has the power to enforce international law? How can they create laws to effectively tell a sovereign nation, such as the United States, what to do? The basis of the second question is why I essentially disagree with the notion of "international laws". The only governing body that should be able to direct a sovereign nation, is the governing body of said sovereign nation.
The idea is if everybody buys into certain behavior, if you act contrary to those behaviors, you become an international pariah, like North Korea. There is no international law that you don't already agree to. The US can't say too much about Chinese maritime borders because we haven't ratified the Law of the Sea. Therefore, we don't have to abide by its terms, though we generally do. The sovereign nation has decided for itself that it will abide by the terms and enforcement if there is any.
The UN. The problem is that if a rogue state is "in" with the 4 nations that have veto power, they can really break the law at will and the whole system comes in to question. Israel is an example of this, with multitudes of violations of international law on their record, yet every UN resolution set forth against them is vetoed by the U.S.
I have been confused about this for a very long time. Who has the power to enforce international law? How can they create laws to effectively tell a sovereign nation, such as the United States, what to do? The basis of the second question is why I essentially disagree with the notion of "international laws". The only governing body that should be able to direct a sovereign nation, is the governing body of said sovereign nation.
Ever heard of Machiavelli?
That's how things work out in the international community.
I have been confused about this for a very long time. Who has the power to enforce international law? How can they create laws to effectively tell a sovereign nation, such as the United States, what to do? The basis of the second question is why I essentially disagree with the notion of "international laws". The only governing body that should be able to direct a sovereign nation, is the governing body of said sovereign nation.
Ready for a serious answer?
There are a number of organizations that by treaty are responsible for enforcing international agreements. The World Trade Organization, the International War Crimes Tribunal, the International Criminal Court, the International Maritime Organization, and the International Civil Aviation Organization are just a few. Each court relies on signatories of these organizational treaties to enforce, threw their respective national courts and law enforcement agencies to prosecute violations. It ain't perfect just as our justice system isn't but there the best we have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.