تأثیر هژمونی در ایجاد نظم و امنیت بین‌المللی و توسعۀ حقوق بین‌الملل

پژوهش نامه ایرانی سیاست بین الملل

مقاله 5، دوره 4، شماره 1، مرداد 1394، صفحه 110-131   

نوع مقاله: مقالات

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22067/jipr.v4i1.48210

نویسندگان

مهدی فیروزآبادیان^{* 1}؛ محمود جلالی کروه²؛ لیلا رئیسی³

¹دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی اصفهان (خوراسگان)

²دانشیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه اصفهان

³دانشگاه آزاد شهر کرد

چکیده

چکیده
ممعمولاً روابط بین حقوق بین‌الملل و سیاست بین‌الملل، رابطه‌ای تقابلی در نظر گرفته می‌شود که یکی در‌برگیرندۀ عدالت و برابری و دیگری دربردارندۀ قدرت است. اغلب چنین فرض می‌شود که حقوق بین‌الملل به وسیلۀ قدرت کاهش می‌یابد؛ زیرا حکومت جهانی برای کنترل قدرت وجود ندارد و آنارشی گزینه‌های اجرایی را کاهش و اثر قوانین در روابط بین‌المللی را محدود می‌کند. فرض این مقاله این است که هژمون موجد، حامی و تثبیت‌کنندۀ قواعد حقوقی بین‌المللی است. کشورهای قدرت‌مند و مخصوصاً دولت‌های هژمون برای کم‌کردن هزینه‌های مربوط به تثبیت صلح و امنیت بین‌المللی، ناگزیر از نهادسازی و به‌کارگیری قواعد حقوقی‌اند، چنان‌که حقوق بین‌الملل نیز برای تحمیل قواعد خود به قدرت نیاز دارد. این مقاله با روش توصیفی– تحلیلی و از منظری تاریخی قصد دارد به بررسی نقش هژمون در گسترش حقوق بین‌الملل بپردازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

حقوق بین‌الملل؛ قدرت؛ صلح و امنیت بین‌الملل؛ هژمونی؛ انگلیس؛ امریکا

مراجع

Ajorloo, M., & Etebar, A. (2008). Position of military power in establishing the hegemony of America after the end of the Cold War. Geopolitical Journal, 3, 162-137. (in Persian).

Antoniades, A. (2008). From Theories of Hegemony to Hegemony Analysis, in International Relations. Retrived from: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/2175.

Urgstaller, M. (2005). Theories of Compliance with International Law. Leiden: The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Cali, B. (2009). International Law for International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Daheshiar, H. (2002). September 11, the structure of the international system and the hegemony of America. Journal of Strategic Studies, 3, 729-738. (in Persian).

Daheshiar, H. (2006). America and reforms of the United Nations: the hegemony of the Note, International Studies Journal, 4,116-94. (in Persian)

Destradi, S. (2008). Empire, hegemony, and leadership: developing a research framework for the Study of Regional Powers. Retrived from www.giga-hamburg.de/workingpapers.

Dunoff, J. (2000). International legal scholarship at the millennium. Chicago Journal of International Law. 85, 66-82.

Eikenberry, J. J. (2004). Only Superpower: America's hegemony in the 21st century, A. Fazli Pour. (Tr.). Tehran: Abrar Moaser Institute. (in Persian).

Gaubatz, K. T. (2006). Democratic States and Commitment in International Relations, in: International Law and International Relations. Simmons, B., Steinberg, R. (Ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ghanbarloo, A. (2006). Hegemonic stability in security-economic strategy of America, Journal of Strategic Studies.4, 901-933. (in Persian)

Griffiths, M. (2005). Beyond the Bush doctrine: American hegemony and world order. Retrived from: www.griffith.edu.au/dspace/handle/10072/24862.

Hafner-Burton, M.; Victor, D., & Lupu, Y. (2012). Political science research on international law: the state of the field, The American Journal of International Law. 106(47), 47-97.

Haji-Yousefi, O. M., & Alvand, M. (2004). Iran and SCO: hegemony and counter-hegemony. Journal of Political Science. 2,163 -194. (in Persian)

Hinnebusch, R. (2006). The Iraq war and international relations: implications for small states. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 19(3), 451-463.

Ipek, P. (2013). Hegemony and crisis in global political economy: the importance of legitimacy. Journal of International Affairs, XVIII (4), 29-45.

Irish, A.; Ku, Ch., & Diehl, P. (2013). Bridging the International law: international relationas divided: taking stock of progress. Georgja Journal of International and Comparative Law, 41(2), 357-388.

Jamshidi, M. (2007). Single power-oriented international systems: unipolar, hegemony, empire. Journal of Strategic Studies. 4, 785-804. (in Persian)

Karami, A. (2006). Hegemony in international politics: a conceptual framework, historical experience and its future. Political Science Research. 3, 1-27. (in Persian)

Khezri, R. (2009). Europe's policy toward America's role in the context of transatlantic relations: liberal hegemonic or imperial. Foreign Policy Journal. 2, 449-474. (in Persian)

Koskenniemi, M. (2004). International law and hegemony: a reconfiguration. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 17(2), 1-26.

Kratochwil, F. (2000). How do norms matter? In the role of law in international politics: essays in international relations and international law.35. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Krept, S. E., & Arend, A. C. (2006). Why states follow the rules: toward a positional theory of adherence to international legal regimes. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law. 16, 331-414.

Krisch, N. (2005). International law in times of hegemony: unequal power and the shaping of the international legal order. The European Journal of International Law. 16(3), 369-408.

Kwakwa, E. (2003). The international community, international law, and the United States: there in one, two against one, or one the same? In Byers, M. & Nolte, G. (Eds), United States Hegemony and Foundations of International Law. 24-42. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Layne, Ch. (2006). The unipolar illusion revisited. International Security. 31(2), 7-33.

Link Liter, A. (2007). Neorealism, critical theory and Bersazy School. Tayyeb, A. (Tr.). Tehran: Office of Political and International Studies. (in Persian)

Mastandono, M. (2004). Incomplete hegemony and security in the Asia-Pacific incomplete order; the in superpower America's hegemony in the 21st century. Fazli Pour, A. (Tr.), Tehran: Moaser Abrar Cultural Institute of International Studies. (in Persian)

Moshirzadeh, H. (2007). The transformation of the theories of international relations. Tehran: the Samt publications. (in Persian)

Moshirzadeh, H., & Jafari, H. (2011). The hegemonic powers and the revolutionary governments: A Case Study of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Foreign Affairs. 1, 47- 78. (in Persian)

Mousavi, R. (2007). The main sources of threats in the international system: the insecurity World. Diplomatic Hamshahri Monthly Magazine. 2(23), 3-23. (in Persian)

Naghibzadeh, R. (2009). Grand theories of international relations. Tehran: Ghomes publication. (in Persian)

Niakouby, A., & Ghiasi, A. (2013). China empowerment and the USA strategy, instrumental view toward Security Council. World Policy Journal. 3, 63-87. (in Persian)

Norton Moore, J. (2004). United States adherence to the law of the sea convention: a compelling national intrest. Retrivied from: www. virginia.edu/colp/pdf/ armed-services-testimony.pdf

Pourahmadi, H. (2008). The political economy of multilateral hegemony-oriented: conceptual synthesis of liberal hegemony and Gramshin paradigm. Journal of Political Science. 2, 68-37. (in Persian)

Rajagopal, B. (2006). Counter-hegemonic international law: rethinking human rights and development as a third world strategy. Third World Quarterly. 27(5), 767 – 783.

Razavipour, A. (2004). The end of the Cold War and the growing influence of USA in the Middle East. Unpublished Master's thesis. Tehran University: Tehran. (in Persian)

Rezaei, A. (2010). Idea-based order: order pattern of United States America in the post-Cold War international system. Political and International Studies Journal. 3, 196-171. (in Persian)

Speace, K. K. (2005). International organizations. Sharifi Tarazkuhi, H. (Tr.) Tehran: Mizan Publication. (in Persian)

Seyfzadeh, H. (2000). In international relations theory, principles and forms of thought. Tehran: Samt publications. (in Persian)

Simmons, B. A., & Steinberg, R. (2006). International Law and International Relations. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Von Glan, G. (2008). An Introduction to Public International Law. Aghayi, D. (Tr.). Tehran: Mizan Publication. (in Persian)

Wallensteen, P. (1992). In the scientific study of peace and war. Vasquez, J. A., & Henehan, M. T. (Eds). Lanham: Lexington Books.