Of Tyrants and Empires

Ethics and International Affairs

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 27-30

  Tesón, Fernando R ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248036015     PISSN: 08926794     EISSN: 17477093     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2005.tb00498.x     Document Type: Letter

References (7)

1. Terry Nardin, “Humanitariaan Imperialism,” Ethics & International Affairs 19, no. 2 (2005), p. 21. All in-text citation references are to this article.
2. I've held my current view since 1988. See the first edition of my book Humanitarian Intervention. See also David Luban, “The Romance of the Nation-State,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 9, no. 2 (1980), p. 395
3. W. Michael Reisman, “Coercion and Self-Determination,” American Journal of International Law 78, no. 3 (1984), p. 642.
4. Nardin suggests that I support intervention to end “ordinary oppression” (p. 22). Not so. My standard is severe tyranny, which is less than genocide or mass murder but more than ordinary oppression.
5. See Allen Buchanan, “Reforming the International Law of Humanitarian Intervention,” in J. L. Holzgrefe and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal, and Political Dilemmas (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 130–73.
6. See Fernando R. Tesón, “The Liberal Case for Humanitarian Intervention,” in Holzgrefe and Keohane, eds., Humanitarian Intervention, p. 53.
7. Similarly, some have suggested that those violations of the laws of war have cancelled the moral worth of the intervention. See, e.g., Mark Danner, “We Are All Torturers Now,” New York Times, January 6, 2005, p. A27.