A Liberal Theory of International Justice advances a novel theory of international justice that combines the orthodox liberal notion that the lives of individuals are what ultimately matter morally with the putatively antiliberal idea of an irreducibly collective right of self-governance. The individual and her rights are placed at center stage insofar as political states are judged legitimate if they adequately protect the human rights of their constituents and respect the rights of all others. Yet, the book argues that legitimate states have a moral right to self-determination and that this right is inherently collective, irreducible to the individual rights of the persons who constitute them. Exploring the implications of these ideas, the book addresses issues pertaining to democracy, secession, international criminal law, armed intervention, political assassination, global distributive justice, and immigration. A number of the positions taken in the book run against the grain of current academic opinion: there is no human right to democracy; separatist groups can be morally entitled to secede from legitimate states; the fact that it is a matter of brute luck whether one is born in a wealthy state or a poorer one does not mean that economic inequalities across states must be minimized or even kept within certain limits; most existing states have no right against armed intervention; and it is morally permissible for a legitimate state to exclude all would-be immigrants.

Recent crises in trade policy and globalization highlight both the problematic role of economic inequality in international trade law and the shortcomings of contemporary, largely economic, approaches to this problem and to international trade law generally. This book argues for an alternative approach to the problem of trade and inequality, as a problem of justice. Drawing on political and moral theory and legal philosophy, the author develops a Rawlsian model for justice as fairness in international trade law. This model highlights the important normative role of the principle of special and differential treatment, which can justify economic inequality by making the wealthy markets of developed states work to the benefit of smaller economies, thus satisfying the difference principle as applied to international economic relations. Applying this model to contemporary trade law, the author offers concrete proposals for modifying existing special and differential treatment doctrine, and suggests ”second generation” policies for the problem of inequality once special and differential treatment is either fully implemented or rendered obsolete. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

In contemporary political philosophy, the subject of global justice has received sustained interest. This is unsurprising, given the nexus between inequality and many of the pressing global problems today, such as immigration, global public health, poverty and violence. Theorists of global justice ask why inequality is morally wrong, what we owe to the global poor, what the implications of global inequality for people in affluent countries are, and the power of agencies or institutions necessary for the realization of a fairer world. Although political philosophers have offered different conceptions of these problems and narratives of the ideal of justice, a major shortcoming of the current discussion are the limits of the concepts and idioms employed. Assumptions are made about the experience of poverty, but little is done to understand the way people in underdeveloped countries experience and understand their predicament. This has resulted in the entrenchment of cognitive inequality in the global justice debate. This book attempts to correct the inaccuracies engendered by the one-sided theorising of global justice. By employing metaphors, concepts and philosophical ideas to reflect on global justice, the book provides an account of global justice that goes beyond current parochial perspective. This book was originally published as a Special Issue of Philosophical Papers.

This topical and timely book critically explores contemporary liberal international relations theory. In the fifty years since the declaration of human rights, the language of international relations has come to incorporate the language of justice and injustice. The book argues that if justice is to become the governing principle of international politics, then liberals must recognise that their political preferences cannot be the preconditions of global ethics. The hierarchy of international political ethics must be constructed afresh so that the first principles of justice are accessible to all agents as political and ethical equals. This book will be essential reading for students and scholars in politics, international relations, political theory and ethics.

John Rawls' text The Law of Peoples has inspired extensive scholarly debate in the field of international political theory, since its publication in 1999. Responding to the arguments of cosmopolitan theorists and Amartya Sen's recent critique, this new work presents a fresh appraisal of the debate, and argues that Rawls offers a persuasive and prescient moral perspective on issues of global poverty and development. By elaborating one of Rawls' core ideas, 'the duty of assistance', the book offers a unique theoretical response to the ideal of global justice. The duty is presented as a far-reaching principle of justice, one that advocates increasing the state capability of burdened societies, and aims to compel the most powerful states to reform international structures and provide aid, in a constructive and culturally sensitive manner. The aim of assistance is the strengthening of democratic, or 'decent' indigenous institutions and the promotion of the freedom of peoples. On Rawls, Development and Global Justice is an original contribution to current debates on international redistribution, democracy promotion and global poverty.

Historical injustice and global inequality are basic problems embedded in territorial rights. In Global Justice and Territory Cara Nine advances a general theory of territorial rights adapting a theoretical framework from natural law theory to ground all territorial claims.

Defending a procedural conception of global justice that calls for the establishment of reasonably democratic arrangements within and beyond the state, this book argues for a justice-based understanding of social development and justifies why a democracy-promoting international development practice is a requirement of global justice.

Most states are multination states, and most peoples are stateless peoples. Just as collectives can behave as sovereign states only if they are recognized by the international community, liberal multination states must recognize stateless peoples in order to determine their political status within that state. There is, however, no agreement on the kind of principles that should be considered, especially under classical liberalism, which gives individuals preeminence over groups. Liberal theories that attempt to accommodate collective rights are often based on a comprehensive version of liberalism that subscribes to moral individualism. Within such a framework, they develop a watered-down concept of collective rights. In A Liberal Theory of Collective Rights Michel Seymour explores the theoretical resources of John Rawls’s political liberalism and shows that this particular approach can accommodate genuine collective rights. By Rawls’s account, Seymour explains, peoples are moral agents and sources of valid moral claims and are therefore entitled to collective rights. These kinds of rights translate, in the constitution of the multination state, to a true political recognition for stateless peoples. Ultimately, A Liberal Theory of Collective Rights answers three important questions: Who is the subject of collective rights? What is the object of collective rights? And can they be institutionalized in real politics?

Global political actors, from states and NGOs to activist groups and individuals, exert influence in societies beyond their own in myriad ways--including via public criticism, consumer boycotts, divestment campaigns, sanctions, and forceful intervention. Often, they do so in the name of justice-promotion. While attempts to promote justice in other societies can do good, they are also often subject to moral criticism and raise several serious moral questions. For example, are there ways to promote one's own ideas about justice in another society while still treating its members tolerantly? Are there ways to do so without disrespecting their legitimate political institutions or undermining their collective self-determination? To understand the ethics of justice-promoting intervention, Lucia M. Rafanelli moves beyond the traditional focus of other scholarship in this area on states waging wars or employing other conventional tools of coercive foreign policy. Specifically, Rafanelli constructs a philosophically-grounded and nuanced ethics of intervention to determine when attempts to promote justice in foreign societies are morally permissible. Promoting Justice Across Borders develops ethical standards for justice-promoting intervention that call on us to rethink received notions about the ordinary bounds of politics, and to abandon the thought that politics does and should take place primarily within the state. These ethical standards also give us a model for how to engage in political struggles for justice on a global scale--not only in conditions of supreme emergency, but in the ordinary circumstances of everyday global politics. They therefore form the basis of a cosmopolitanism that is neither premised upon nor aimed at bringing about the end of politics. Ultimately, Rafanelli shows how the promotion of justice everywhere can be the legitimate (political) concern of people anywhere.

The fairness of institutions of global economic governance ranks among the most pressing issues of our time.