Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
European Journal of International Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LANG, A. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Responsibility in the International System:

Reading US Foreign Policy in the Middle East

ANTHONY F. LANG, JR

The American University in Cairo

This article explores the norm of state responsibility by asking two research questions — (1) How do states become the responsible agents rather than people in International Relations? (2) What are the consequences of holding states responsible? States become responsible because of the structure of the international system and the power of the dominant states in that system. This hypothesis is explained by demonstrating how international law and foreign policy require state agents that can be held responsible for their actions, but do not depend on specification of free will within the state for holding it responsible. This hypothesis is counterintuitive to the assumption that responsibility derives from free will. The consequence of a state being held responsible is that individual agency is undermined, leading to violations of civil and political rights. This hypothesis is explained by the effects of war, reparations and lack of support for political dissent in a responsible state agent. The argument is supported by a case study of US foreign policy toward Iraq. The conclusion is that state responsibility is not a viable moral construct in the late 20th century. While blame and responsibility will continue to play a role in International Relations, we must realize that the decision to blame is a political one, reflecting political relationships and levels of power.

European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 5, No. 1, 67-107 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/1354066199005001003


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?