Hilaire McCoubrey wrote extensively in the area of armed conflict law, and on the issues of collective security law and the law relating to arms control. Although he died at the early age of 46 in 2000 he had contributed significantly to the separate study of these areas, but also to the idea of studying the issues as a whole subject. The collection covers difficult and controversial issues in the area of conflict and security law. The contributors, drawn both from academe and practice, provide expert analysis of many aspects of the law governing armed conflict and collective security. As well as providing a fitting tribute to the main aspects of Hilaire's contribution to knowledge, the volume provides a coherent reconsideration and development of key aspects of conflict and security law at a time when that law is being applied, breached, debated or reformed on almost a daily basis.

James Crossland's work traces the history of the International Committee of the Red Cross' struggle to bring humanitarianism to the Second World War, by focusing on its tumultuous relationship with one of the conflict's key belligerents and masters of the blockade of the Third Reich, Great Britain.

This new edition of the popular The Strategy Pathfinder updates the micro-cases of real-life problems faced by companies and executives. These micro-cases help readers to engage with the kinds of situations they will encounter in their working lives while provoking discussions about key theoretical themes. Original presentation and design makes this an essential companion for both the business-school classroom and the executive briefcase. The Strategy Pathfinder brings experienced and potential executives alike an instant guide to the concepts and techniques they need to know. An innovative introduction to strategy. Makes readers active “producers” of strategy, rather than passive recipients of received wisdom. Presents essential pathways through the strategy jungle. Each case provokes discussion about a key theoretical theme. Encourages readers to form a view themselves, and then test it against the views of others, before offering recommendations about how best to proceed. Cases are drawn from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe and Oceania. Supported by online lecturer supplements.

Just War has attracted considerable attention. The words peace and justice are often used together. Surprisingly, however, little conceptual thinking has gone into what constitutes a Just Peace. This book, which includes some of the world's leading scholars, debates and develops the concept of Just Peace. The problem with the idea of a Just Peace is that striving for justice may imply a Just War. In other words, peace and justice clash at times. Therefore, one often starts from a given view of what constitutes justice, but this a priori approach leads - especially when imposed from the outside - straight into discord. This book presents conflicting viewpoints on this question from political, historical, and legal perspectives as well as from a policy perspective. The book also argues that Just Peace should be defined as a process resting on four necessary and sufficient conditions: thin recognition whereby the other is accepted as autonomous; thick recognition whereby identities need to be accounted for; renouncement, requiring significant sacrifices from all parties; and finally, rule, the objectification of a Just Peace by a "text" requiring a common language respecting the identities of each, and defining their rights and duties. This approach based on a language-oriented process amongst directly concerned parties, goes beyond liberal and culturalist perspectives. Throughout the process, negotiators need to build a novel shared reality as well as a new common language allowing for an enduring harmony between previously clashing peoples. It challenges a liberal view of peace founded on norms claiming universal scope. The liberal conception has difficulty in solving conflicts such as civil wars characterized typically by fundamental disagreements between different communities. Cultures make demands that are identity-defining, and some of these defy the "cultural neutrality" that is one of the foundations of liberalism. Therefore, the concept of Just Peace cannot be solved within the liberal tradition.