Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T13:05:17.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The rational enforcement of international law: solving the sanctioners’ dilemma

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

Alexander Thompson
Alexander Thompson*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium on Andrew Guzman's How International Law Works
Information
International Theory , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , July 2009 , pp. 307 - 321
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, K.W.Snidal, D. (1998), ‘Why states act through formal international organizations’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 42: 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, K.W.Snidal, D. (2000), ‘Hard and soft law in international governance’, International Organization 54: 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alt, J.E., Calvert, R.L.Humes, B.D. (1988), ‘Reputation and hegemonic stability: a game-theoretic analysis’, American Political Science Review 82(2): 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, R. (1984), The Evolution of Cooperation, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1977), The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, A.Chayes, A.H. (1995), The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkel, J. (2001), ‘Why comply? Social learning and European identity change’, International Organization 55(3): 553–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, X. (2007), International Institutions and National Policies, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, G.W.Jones, M.A. (2002), ‘Reputation, compliance, and international law’, Journal of Legal Studies 31: S95–S114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, G.W., Rocke, D.M.Barsoom, P.N. (1996), ‘Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?’, International Organization 50: 379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drezner, D.W. (2000), ‘Bargaining, enforcement, and multilateral sanctions: when is cooperation counterproductive?’, International Organization 54(1): 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drezner, D.W. (2003), ‘The hidden hand of economic coercion’, International Organization 57: 643–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1989), The Cement of Society, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, M. (2000), ‘Are legal norms distinctive?’, NYU Journal of International Law and Politics 32: 699–705.Google Scholar
Franck, T.M. (1990), The Power of Legitimacy among Nations, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, J.L.Posner, E.A. (2005), The Limits of International Law, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greif, A. (1989), ‘Reputation and coalitions in medieval trade’, Journal of Economic History 49: 857–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, A.T. (2008), How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, A.T. (in this volume), ‘How international law works’, International Theory 1: 285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, O.A. (2005), ‘Between power and principle: an integrated theory of international law’, University of Chicago Law Review 72: 469–536.Google Scholar
Kahler, M. (2000), ‘Conclusion: the causes and consequences of legalization’, International Organization 54(3): 661–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kandori, M. (1992), ‘Social norms and community enforcement’, Review of Economic Studies 59(198): 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R.O. (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O. (1997), ‘International relations and international law: two optics’, Harvard International Law Journal 38(2): 487–502.Google Scholar
Koh, H.H. (1997), ‘Why do nations obey international law?’, Yale Law Journal 106(8): 2599–2659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreps, D.M.Wilson, R. (1982), ‘Reputation and imperfect information’, Journal of Economic Theory 27: 253–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kydd, A. (2001), ‘Trust building, trust breaking: the dilemma of NATO enlargement’, International Organization 55(4): 801–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kydd, A. (in this volume), ‘A bridge too near? Guzman on international law’, International Theory 1: 295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, E.L.Sikkink, K. (2000), ‘International human rights law and practice in Latin America’, International Organization 54: 633–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, J.J. (1994/95), ‘The false promise of international institutions’, International Security 19: 5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercer, J. (1996), Reputation and International Politics, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Milgrom, P.R., North, D.R.Weingast, B.R. (1990), ‘The role of institutions in the revival of trade’, Economics and Politics 2: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G.D. (2003), ‘Hypotheses on reputation: alliance choices and the shadow of the past’, Security Studies 12: 40–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, H.V. (1997), Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations, Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R.B. (1998), ‘Sources of transparency: information systems in international regimes’, International Studies Quarterly 42: 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenthau, H.J. (1985), Politics among Nations, 6th edn., New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Nye, J.S. (2004), Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Olson, M. (1965), The Logic of Collective Action, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oye, K.A. (ed.) (1986), Cooperation under Anarchy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, K.A. (2001), Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, B.A. (2000), ‘International law and state behavior: commitment and compliance in international monetary affairs’, American Political Science Review 94(4): 819–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J.M. (2000), ‘The politics of dispute settlement design: explaining legalism in regional trade blocs’, International Organization 54: 137–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, D. (1985), ‘The limits of hegemonic stability theory’, International Organization 39(4): 579–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallberg, J. (2002), ‘Paths to compliance: enforcement, management, and the European Union’, International Organization 56(3): 609–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, W. (2001), The Ethics of Destruction, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. (2006), ‘Coercion through IOs: the Security Council and the logic of information transmission’, International Organization 60: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, A. (2009), Channels of Power: The UN Security Council and US Statecraft in Iraq, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Tomz, M. (2007), Reputation and International Cooperation, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wallander, C. (1999), Mortal Friends, Best Enemies: German–Russian Cooperation after the Cold War, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Walt, S.M. (2005), Taming American Power, New York: W.W. Norton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, B.R. (1997), ‘The political foundations of democracy and the rule of law’, American Political Science Review 91(2): 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar