Although there is no international government, and no global police agency enforces the rules, nations obey international law. In this provocative study, Franck employs a broad range of historical, legal, sociological, anthropological, political, and philosophical modes of analysis to unravel the mystery of what makes states and people perceive rules as legitimate. Demonstrating that virtually all nations obey most rules nearly all of the time, Franck reveals that the more legitimate laws and institutions appear to be, the greater is their capacity for compliance. Distilling those factors which increase the perception of legitimacy, he shows how a community of rules can be fashioned from a system of sovereign states without creating a global leviathan.

This book reflects on the reasons for the decline of international cooperation in world politics and studies ways to restore legitimacy in the international order. It engages with the concept of legitimacy in international relations theories and practices to examine the discussions around power shifts, the decline of liberalism, demands for inclusive international architectures, and challenges to multilateralism, as well as established norms by leaders and nationalisms. It studies the impact of the post-COVID-19 world order on the nature of power in the international system and changes in normative concerns of security. The volume also interrogates political legitimacy through an area studies lens by examining the concept of legitimacy separately in the USA, Europe, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Latin America, and Africa. An important and timely text featuring contributions from eminent scholars, this book will be of use to students and researchers of modern history, political science, and international relations. It will also be of interest to think tanks and policy-making bodies concerned with international affairs and foreign policy.

Political theory has undergone a remarkable development in recent years. A systematic study of legitimacy within social science, the book starts as a critique of Weber and examines the link betwen a social-scientific approach and the various philosophical traditions of theorizing about legitimacy.

A major departure from mainstream security studies, this book mounts a thoughtful challenge to realist theories of crisis bargaining. It tests the proposition that normative standards of behavior influence state actions in security-related conflicts. Specifically, it examines the construction of bilateral norms as the settlements of security-related disputes and the effects these settlements have on subsequent interactions over the same issue. Drawing on institutionalist arguments about the informational impact of norms, Christopher Gelpi contends that norms act as signals that give meaning to other states' behavior in at least two important ways. First, they provide a mutually acceptable focal point for limiting both demands and concessions. Second, security norms change the context in which coercive behavior is interpreted. That is, norms can cause coercive behavior to be interpreted as punishment rather than aggression. Gelpi tests this argument against its most prominent competitor--a realist model of crisis bargaining--in three stages. First, he uses a probit analysis to perform a quantitative test on the population of 122 reinitiated international crises between 1929 and 1979. Second, he conducts detailed case studies of the Cienfuegos Submarine Conflict and the Six Day War. Finally, he conducts a second statistical analysis examining the conditions under which security norms will succeed or fail. While hypotheses derived from realist coercion theory receive only mixed support, Gelpi finds strong evidence that states can and do construct normative standards that guide their behavior in international crises.

This book sheds new light on the continuing debate within political thought as to what constitutes power, and what distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate power. It does so by considering the experience of Russia, a polity where experiences of the legitimacy of power and the collapse of power offer a contrast to Western experiences on which most political theory, formulated in the West, is based. The book considers power in a range of contexts - philosophy and discourse; the rule of law and its importance for economic development; the use of culture and religion as means to legitimate power; and liberalism and the reasons for its weakness in Russia. The book concludes by arguing that the Russian experience provides a useful lens through which ideas of power and legitimacy can be re-evaluated and re-interpreted, and through which the idea of "the West" as the ideal model can be questioned.

This book sheds new light on the continuing debate within political thought as to what constitutes power, and what distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate power. It does so by considering the experience of Russia, a polity where experiences of the legitimacy of power and the collapse of power offer a contrast to Western experiences on which most political theory, formulated in the West, is based. The book considers power in a range of contexts - philosophy and discourse; the rule of law and its importance for economic development; the use of culture and religion as means to legitimate power; and liberalism and the reasons for its weakness in Russia. The book concludes by arguing that the Russian experience provides a useful lens through which ideas of power and legitimacy can be re-evaluated and re-interpreted, and through which the idea of "the West" as the ideal model can be questioned.

How does the idea of public justification and adjacent concepts figure in the work of John Rawls? This book offered a detailed study which allows for an interpretation of how A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism converge and diverge. It also offers a systematic appraisal of the different strands and genealogy of legitimacy theory, both descriptive and normative. In so doing, it brings a fresh new perspective to this important element of Rawls's theory.

The stature of Max Weber (1864-1920) as an interdisciplinary, historical-comparative social scientist has grown steadily. But in view of Professor Murvar, his work has been misinterpreted with remarkable frequency. The aim of this book is to put right certain misconceptions and misinterpretations of Max Weber's intellectual and scientific legacy. This book challenges assumptions about various aspects of Weber's work; the issues of modernization, evolutionary theories, world systems, growth of liberty, typologies of power structures and legitimacies, among others. As well as presenting precise criticism and appreciation of the way Weber's work has been handled by his successors, this book also details the specific advancement he himself made within the theory of liberty, legitimacy and power. There is special emphasis on how much Weber's work in these core areas has survived the test of time. This book was first published in 1985.