Amazingly, this is the highest mark I’ve gotten so far on a University paper – 78, or a B+. I’m shooting for at least an A- in the class, hopefully an A. So we’ll see how this paper affects that grade after the exams.

The Liberal and Realist Meanings of the US Intervention in Lebanon in 1958
By Chris Evangelista, October 26, 2006
Prof. Lilach Gilady / TA: Anna Shamaeva
POL208Y1, Introduction to International Relations

This paper will use the realist, liberal and constructivist theoretical approaches to provide an explanation for the American decision to intervene in Lebanon in 1958. First, explanations and limitations provided by the realist and liberal theoretical approaches will be discussed. Then, the argument will be made that a constructivist approach is necessary to show the link that can be found between these two perspectives, as a result of the cultural interpretation of the meanings behind the actions of US political and military leaders.

Realism
Using the realist assumptions of statism, survival, and self-help[1], we are able to extract the most apparent explanation for the United States’ decision to intervene in Lebanon. First, we see that this intervention was initiated by a request for aid from Lebanon’s President Chamoun. In response to this, the US made it clear that their intention was to secure Lebanon’s independence and security, not Chamoun’s re-election.[2] This is indicative of the United States’ adherence to the first realist assumption of state sovereignty. Next, within the US’ preoccupation with the suppression of the Soviet Union’s influence in the Middle East, we see the United States’ “pre-eminent goal of survival”.[3] Because Lebanon was “the only pro-Western, democratic country in the Middle East”,[4] the intervention was necessary for the US to ensure that they can maintain Lebanon as a foothold in the Middle East.[5] Finally, this US decision also contains the characteristics of self-help as it was made in light of the United Nations’ inability to “intervene usefully”.[6] It also helps to explain the intervention in terms of the US’ need to maintain the balance of power in the region.

While realist interpretation provides an “obvious” explanation for the US decision to intervene, it does not account for some of the decisions made by US political and military leaders on how to manage the military campaign. For example, the intervening military force was constrained by strict rules of engagement stipulating that they are to fire only in self-defence.[7] This would have been contrary to the realist requirement, in its concept of survival, for morality to be subjected to a favourable outcome.[8] To explain these decisions we must turn to a liberal interpretation.

Liberalism
The liberal interpretation of the intervention provides a more detailed, though at times more subtle explanation. For example, while it was obvious that the intervention was necessary to maintain US survival and balance of power in the region, it was also necessary to perpetuate the threatened democracy of the country and to encourage democracy in the region. Protecting democracy would have been a means to promote peace, in light of the liberal idea that democracies tended not to fight each other.[9] The promotion of peace can also be seen even within the decision to conduct a military intervention. It is in the strict rules of engagement present during the conflict, and the efforts made by Military leaders to explain the necessity of these orders to the Marines. This resulted in the remarkable fire discipline displayed by the Marines on the ground, which was an “important stabilizing feature of the American intervention.”[10] Finally, in explaining one of the more obvious liberal interpretations of the intervention, Lebanon’s economic importance as the “crossroads to Africa, Europe, and Asia”[11] and the US’ concern that the crisis would interrupt the continued availability of oil from the Middle East[12] has to be taken into consideration. These economic concerns are in line with Liberal ideas of using economic openness to promote peace and democracy.[13]

The liberal interpretation is not without its limits, the foremost of which is its inability to explain the lack of action by the United Nations. The UN’s inability to act in this situation is contradictory with the liberal idea that international institutions can provide alternative mechanisms to resolve the conflict.[14] Also, while liberal theory provides adequate explanations for the intervention; and, while these explanations did not necessarily contradict those provided by realism, liberal explanations tended to remain secondary. For example, while promoting democracy in Lebanon and in the region was a noble cause, its peaceful effects would not have been immediately felt, as it would have needed some time to develop, and some more countries to adapt it. A much more pressing concern was the maintenance of the balance of power in order to prevent the Soviet Union from dominating. However, when we look at the constructivist concept of applying social meanings to the event, we can see that a balanced link can be established between the two perspectives.

Constructivism
In order to see how culture defines the meanings of the US intervention in Lebanon, we must define American culture in 1958 itself. And the fact is that American culture is defined both by liberal ideology, and a realist interpretation of the world around them. The very foundation of American government is rooted in liberal democracy,[15] although its policies are also affected by the United States’ position as the principal opponent for world hegemony of the introverted communist power, the Soviet Union.[16] It is this cultural context that constructs the liberal and realist meanings of the American actions in Lebanon. Using this approach, we are able to find a link between the two approaches.

In considering this cultural background, we find that the realist and liberal explanations of the US intervention in Lebanon do not contradict, but rather complement each other. The social constructs of the time required the United States to recognize the threat of Soviet domination and thus the need to maintain the balance of power, while its political roots caused it to react by promoting democracy. In this situation, the communist threat of Soviet domination is a threat against democracy itself, making it necessary for liberalism to depend on the realist assumption of the need for the balance of power. In the same way, because communism is the competition, then in order to compete and maintain the balance of power, promoting democracy becomes necessary. This makes both the realist and liberal approaches the means to the end: peace.

It is obvious in this situation that because it was able to link the obvious conclusions of the realist approach and the subtleties of the liberal approach, that the constructivist approach is the best approach to use. While some might consider constructivism an illusion – after all, the constructivist interpretation merely led to realist and liberal interpretations – because of its concern with the “big picture” in considering the entire culture as a whole, it was able to explain the United States’ decision to intervene in Lebanon with more depth. It does so by culturally linking what would otherwise have been seen as the competing interpretations of liberalism and realism.

Conclusion
These theoretical approaches provide us with an excellent basis to explain world events, by simplifying these events and allowing us to focus on specific variables, allowing for concise interpretations. Just like the example of the full-scale map being useless when finding directions,[17] examining every single aspect of an event can be cumbersome, and in fact impossible. Like the map needs to be scaled down, so must the event become a paradigm in order for it to be tangibly examined; however, the concern is that events are sometimes oversimplified, causing some aspects of the event to be ignored, or left unexplained. Such was the case with the realist and liberal perspectives as each narrowly approached the event according to its own assumptions.

But, when a balance is found in defining assumptions and in prudently creating paradigms, such as the case in this situation with constructivism, a sufficient explanation may be produced that aids in our understanding of international relations.

Works Cited

Dunne, Tim and Schmidt, Brian. “Realism”. In The Globalization of World
Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 161 – 183.

Gilady,
Lilach. 2006. Lecture 2: Levels of Analysis, POL208: Introduction to
International Relations. University 006Ff Toronto.

Korbani, Agnes. U.S.
Intervention in Lebanon, 1958 and 1982 (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1991).

Ikenberry, G. John. “America’s Liberal Grand Strategy: Democracy and
National Security in the Post-War Era”. In American Foreign Policy: Theoretical
Essays (New York: Pearson-Longman, 2004), 268-289.

Shulimson, Jack.
Marines in Lebanon 1958 (Washington, DC: Historical Branch, G-3 Division
Headquarters, US Marine Corps).

James Wilson, American Government Brief
Version 7th Edition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005).

[1] Tim Dunne and Brian Schmidt, “Realism”. In The Globalization
of World Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 161.
[2] Jack Shulimson, Marines in Lebanon 1958 (Washington, DC:
Historical Branch, G-3 Division Headquarters, US Marine Corps), 5.
[3] Dunne, 174.
[4] Agnes Korbani, U.S. Intervention in Lebanon, 1958 and 1982
(New York: Praeger Publishers, 1991), 30.
[5] Korbani, 23.
[6] Korbani, 44.
[7] Shulimson, 22
[8] Dunne, 176.
[9] G. John Ikenberry, “America’s Liberal Grand Strategy:
Democracy and National Security in the Post-War Era”. In American Foreign
Policy: Theoretical Essays (New York: Pearson-Longman, 2004), 274.
[10] Shulimson, 32
[11] Shulimson, 1
[12] Korbani, 23.
[13] Ikenberry, 277.
[14] Ikenberry, 280.
[15] James Wilson, American Government Brief Version 7th Edition
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005), 2.
[16] Ikenberry, 273.
[17] Lilach Gilady, 2006. Lecture 2: Levels of Analysis, POL208:
Introduction to International Relations. University of Toronto.

This paper is actually really cool. It evolved so many times as I was writing it… topic to topic, but then finally, while I was preparing for the mid-term, I kind of got it. I really like this essay because in the midst of an incredibly secular (or as they would call it, “academic”) study of the Bible, I was still able to pick out some of the things I learned in Bible School from the class.

The main principle comes in the form of the Deuteronomic Thesis. When I read this, I was like. Wow! It was basically a very “academic” way of saying what I learned in Bible School – this is, learning to rest in Christ. The thesis basically states this: that when the Israelites were trusting Jehovah, they were prospering; and when they weren’t, they were in trouble. That of course is a very basic way of stating the thesis. I think I talk about it more in the essay.

The Woman Who Fears the Lord
By Chris Evangelista, November 24, 2005
Prof. S. Metso
NMC280H1, Hebrew Bible

Found in Proverbs 31 is the prominent portrayal of a desirable woman. In the chapter, the woman’s importance is well-stated and is almost contradictory to the perception of women in Biblical times as inferior. This description is an exhortation of a woman who fears the Lord, which is in fact an application of the deuteronomistic thesis of the blessings promised for those in obedience to the Lord.

The key to this understanding is found in the initial description of the ideal woman in Proverbs 31: “A capable wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels.” This word, “capable”, is the governing characteristic of this woman whose virtues are explained in the following verses. In More Precious than Pearls, this word is translated as “valour” or literally, strength. Heller then further explains that this valour also refers to wealth or abundance. She writes: “the poem begins by referring to the ideal Jewish woman as one who has the awareness of being blessed with abundance.” This description does not at first seem to be virtuous; however, when compared with the deuteronomic promises regarding blessings and curses, a clear parallel can be seen. Deuteronomy 28:1-2 reads: “If you will only obey the Lord your God, by diligently observing all his commandments that I am commanding you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth; all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, if you obey the Lord your God.” This passage provides a clear cause for the abundant blessing that come upon Israel, and that is their obedience to the Lord. This cause can also be inferred for the wealth and abundance of the ideal wife, whose virtues are caused by her obedience to the YHWH.

Another approach is taken by Waltke in his commentary on the book of Proverbs. While also referring to the “capable wife” as a “woman of valour”, Waltke explores the possibility that this ideal woman can be paralleled with the “Woman of Wisdom” in Proverbs 1 and 8. In these chapters, wisdom is personified as a woman: “Wisdom cries out in the street; in the squares she raises her voice” ; “Does not wisdom call, and does not understanding raise her voice?” This argument is further solidified when you consider the common characteristics of Woman of Wisdom and the Woman of Valour: both valiant, rare, precious, and trustworthy. That the valiant wife is an allegory for the woman of wisdom is the assertion that this woman fears the Lord for “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction”. From this we can yet again infer that this valiant wife is one who is obedient to the YHWH, which as the deuteronomic thesis states allow her to be blessed and be a blessing. Furthermore, Waltke writes argues that the woman of valour is used by God as a heroic figure, in much the same way that he used the ancient judges and kings in order to do good for His people. This comparison of the woman of valour and of ancient judges and kings further solidifies her parallel with the deuteronomic thesis, which is applied traditionally to the judges and kings. Through this or Heller’s explanation, it is still clear that the virtues of this “capable woman” are derived from her obedience to YHWH.

The rest of the chapter goes on to give examples of the deeds of “capable wife”, which Waltke explains is as “an important contributor to the economy of the family and of the community.” In verses 13-22, her impact on the physical well-being of her family is clearly seen. She is a diligent worker whose entrepreneurial skills are profitable for her household, and even goes as far as the ability to handle real estate and business. She also provides necessities such as food, commodities, and clothing, or even luxuries such as “food from far away.” This contribution to the economic needs of her household is part of the blessings promised by YHWH in the Deuteronomy 28:” Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed shall you be in the field. Blessed shall be the fruit of your womb, the fruit of your ground, and the fruit of your livestock, both the increase of your cattle and the issue of your flock… The Lord will make you abound in prosperity… These blessings are most clearly seen in verses 15 and 16 where her labours are clearly fruitful: “she rises while it is still night and provides food for her household… she considers a field and buys it; with the fruit of her hands she plants a vineyard”. And then, these promised blessings are not only the needs but also for abundance, which is expressed in verse 20, “She opens her hand to the poor, and reaches out her hands to the needy”. For not only is she able to provide for her household, but has an abundance to be shared with those who are needy.

The blessings further promises the Israelites their prominence established among the nations: “The Lord will establish you as his holy people, as he has sworn to you, if you keep the commandments of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. All the peoples of the earth shall see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they shall be afraid of you.” This is seen, though in a smaller sense with the capable woman and her effect on how her household is seen in the social standing. Her husband is well known and is an elder while she herself is known to be clothed in strength and dignity. She is also a teacher in knowledge, and does not live in idle. These socio-moral virtues are what other would attribute to the capable wife, as would other nations attribute moral leadership to the nation of Israel in their obedience to the Lord, and their purpose to follow his commandments. Such is the effect on the capable woman and her family’s social standing as a result of her obedience to YHWH.

Finally, these virtues are passed on to her children, who see her example and consider her “happy”. This is a theme of the deuteronomic thesis, as children are almost always mentioned when the promises of prosperity is given to the Israelites: “Choose life so that you and your descendants may live, loving the Lord your God, obeying him, and holding fast to him.” This realization that the children have of her happiness is also their acknowledgement of the path she took in order to live a worthy life. Heller writes that they recognize “in short, that she has been a superlative mother, they respect her accordingly, and they are ready to continue along the path she has set out before them.” This is the culmination and ultimate realization of the woman’s capability, that she now has the ability to pass on to her children the godly lifestyle that she has chosen to live. That her children consider her happy is their own realization that they will also be happy should they choose the path that she has set out for them. It does not end there, though, as she also has an influence on her husband who also calls her happy and goes on to praise her: “many women have done excellently, but you surpass them all.” This shows her role in the spiritual development of those around her, which in addition to the legacy left to her children, is also another example of how YHWH has used her as an example to those around her: “She has risen above others, because her family members all need her… as the primary educator of her children, she will always be the one whose expectations they want to fulfill. As helpmate to her husband, she encourages him in the right direction.” She is the embodiment of YHWH’s grand plan to use his people as an example for other nations.

The end of the chapter is the reiteration of the merit in fearing the Lord. It even compared to charm and beauty which are seen as deceitful and vain, while fearing the Lord is to be praised. To be lifted up is what should be done to the virtues which uphold the demands of YHWH’s laws. Its influence is far reaching; just as the Lord’s blessings would have been should Israel have simply obeyed him. Though in a much limited since, these blessings are seen in the “capable woman” as she purposes to obey and trust in the Lord.

Sources
• Coogan, Michael D. “Proverbs 8” The New Oxford Annotated Bible (1989): 913-915.
• Coogan, Michael D. “Proverbs 31” The New Oxford Annotated Bible (1989): 913-915.
• Harris, Stephen L. “Chapter 25 / Proverbs” The Old Testament. An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible (2003): 298-301.
• Heller, Tziporah. “More Precious Than Pearls: Selected Insights into the Qualities of the Ideal Woman”. New York: Feldheim. 1993.
• Waltke, Bruce K. “The Book of Proverbs: Chapters 15:31” Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2005.
• Masenya, Madipoane. “How Worthy is the Woman of Worth?” New York: Peter Lang Publishing. 2004.

This paper was my favourite paper of all – and the one I spent the most time on. Just the writing alone took just under 15 hours. Along with the research, I spent a total of about 50 hours on it. It makes sense, cause it was for my favourite class too. Political Science. And it was on a topic I really enjoyed.

I got a B+ on this paper, and an A- in the class. So all that work was worth it. This topic is also something that I’m sure I will write on again in the future.

The Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court
By Chris Evangelista, March 20, 2005
Prof. R. Diebert & J. Stein
POL108Y1, Global Networks

Introduction

On 7 July 1998, one-hundred-thirty nations voted in favour to adapt the Rome Statute, which is the governing document of the International Criminal Court (ICC). On 1 July 2002, the statute came into effect after 60 nations ratified the treaty, formally establishing the court; its purpose, to “promote the rule of law and ensure that the gravest international crimes do not go unpunished.” The ICC fulfills this purpose by prosecuting individuals for what are known as the “core crimes”: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, as well as a new addition called crimes of aggression.

Since the conception of the Rome Statute, there has been much debate around the legitimacy of the court’s jurisdiction. The United States, a major player in world politics has been in opposition to the treaty from the very beginning, voting against it along with only 7 other nations. Then, on 31 December 2000, the very last day allowed, President Bill Clinton signed the treaty, hoping that it would give the United States a continuous voice of influence as the process of establishing the Court proceeds; however, he reiterated US concerns that the treaty remained fundamentally flawed and stated that he would not submit the treaty for ratification by his government. This US Opposition to the treaty continued with the administration of George W. Bush.

The United States remained active in the preparatory commission meetings but were not satisfied, stating that they “were ultimately unable obtain the remedies necessary to overcome our fundamental concerns.” As a result, when the treaty was ratified by enough countries to enable it to come into force on 11 April 2002, the United States withdrew its signature from the treaty “so as not to create unwarranted expectations of U.S. involvement in the Court.”

With the United States’ considerable influence, their opposition to the International Criminal Court severely hinders the court’s authority, and consequently, its mission to bring international criminals to justice. The question is: What roadblocks stand in the way of the International Criminal Court’s emergence as a legitimate source of justice against the transgressors of core crimes?

This paper will argue that the discrepancies between the authority of the ICC, as provided by the Rome Statute, and the democratic practices of nations like the United States are such that it becomes impossible for the ICC to be acceptable in its current form. The United States’ position regarding international justice is straightforward: while they wish to continue being a world leader in promoting the rule of law and punishing international criminals, they believe that “states, not international institutions are primarily responsible for ensuring justice in the international system.” Furthermore, they raise serious doubts around the legitimacy of the ICC because of what they call “fundamental flaws” that allow for the ICC to retain unchecked and unbalanced power, and to operate with a severe democratic deficit.

Universal Jurisdiction vs. State Sovereignty

The subject matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court is found in Article 5 of the Rome Statute. It assigns to the court the responsibility for four categories of crimes: the crime of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and, the crime of aggression. This list of crimes is not generally disputed, as a consensus has long been achieved that these are crimes that are of greatest concern to the human race. William Schabas writes of these crimes: “They dictate prosecution because humanity as a whole is the victim. Moreover, humanity as a whole is entitled, indeed required, to prosecute them for essentially the same reasons as we now say that humanity as a whole is concerned by violations of human rights that were once considered to lie within the exclusive prerogatives of State sovereignty.” These crimes were first established during the Nuremberg Trials after World War 2 and have evolved alongside the human rights movement to become well accepted as crimes which demand the most attention from the international community.

There is also wide acceptance for the definitions of these crimes, except for the crime of aggression. Although they were known by different names, most of these crimes were prosecuted in Nuremberg, and have since continued to evolve into what we know of today through treaties such as the 1984 Convention Against Torture. The only crime that is of concern to the opposition is the crime of aggression, which is a new crime that has yet to be defined.

So it is not the subject matter jurisdiction of the ICC that is of concern to those opposed to the treaty, but rather, the most debated element of the court’s jurisdiction are personal (ratione personae) jurisdiction, and territorial (ratione loci) jurisdiction. These are also the elements that perceivably give the ICC this “universal jurisdiction” that the Americans so bitterly complain about. While the personal jurisdiction of the ICC, as set out in Article 12 (2) (b) of the Rome Statute, is limited to the nationals of a State that is a party to the treaty, the court’s claim with regards to territorial jurisdiction would seem to override this: Article 12 (2) (a) of the Rome Statute states that the ICC will have jurisdiction over core crimes that are committed on the territory of its party states. Although the nationality of the offender is not mentioned in this clause, it is widely assumed, especially by the Americans, that this would mean that the Court has the jurisdiction to prosecute anyone, regardless of their nationality, who commits a core crime within the territory of a party state. Marc Grossman, of the United States Department of State writes: “The treaty threatens the sovereignty of the United States. The Court, as constituted today, claims the authority to detain and try American citizens, even though our democratically-elected representatives have not agreed to be bound by the treaty.” The Americans argue that in order for cases to be resolved legally, they should be handled on a case by case basis with the jurisdiction for difficult cases assigned by a competent authority. Their argument is exemplified in the way situations that required the prosecution of these crimes were resolved with in the past. This was through the ad hoc international tribunals that were established by the United Nations Security Council to investigate and prosecute crimes committed in Bosnia and Rwanda. Grossman continues his argument, stating: “In situations where violations are so grave as to amount to a breach of international peace and security… the international community may, and if necessary should, intercede through the UN Security Council.”

On the contrary, Helen Duffy, writing for Human Rights Watch, presents a different angle for this idea of “universal jurisdiction.” While reiterating the universal nature of the crimes prosecuted in the ICC, she also presents an interesting argument with respect to the territorial jurisdiction that States hold. In his response to the ICC’s claim over territorial jurisdiction, Marc Grossman writes: “While sovereign nations have the authority to try non-citizens who have committed crimes against their citizens or in their territory, the United States has never recognized the right of an international organization to do so absent consent or a UN Security Council mandate.” Duffy, on the other hand, puts a twist on this argument, making it favourable towards the universal jurisdiction of the Court. She writes: “By ratifying the statute, states would then confer upon the Court the power that each of them would have individually, to investigate and prosecute the crimes subject to universal jurisdiction, without being required to obtain the “acceptance” or “consent” of any State.” This differing perspective would, through their very own arguments, seem to satisfy American concerns about where the ICC’s authority is derived.

It is easy to see the implication that a State which chooses to become a party of the Rome Statute would in turn transfer their rights of prosecution to the ICC. That is why it is unfortunate that this is not explicitly stated in the Rome Statute as such a clause would have removed any doubts about where the ICC derives its jurisdiction. This argument is difficult to confront, as it is clear that from established precedents, the ICC has a legitimate claim to its territorial jurisdiction. However, there is problem that does arise when the term “universal jurisdiction” is applied.

Henry Kissinger would argue that the term “universal jurisdiction” is quite new, citing the term’s absence from the most recent edition at the time of Black’s Law Dictionary (an entry still has still not been made in the current – 8th – edition) as evidence of this. He writes: “The doctrine of universal jurisdiction is based on the proposition that the individuals or cases subject to it have been clearly identified… But many issues are much more vague… It is this fuzziness that risks arbitrariness on the part of prosecutors and judges.” The invocation of a universal jurisdiction is unsettling, having the connotation of absolute authority; for while it is true that the ICC’s legal claim to prosecute offenders of core crimes according to its statute is legitimate, the practice of such an authority must be kept accountable and in balance. Currently, according to Article 15 of the Rome Statute, the only requirement for the prosecutor to initiate an investigation or prosecution is the approval of two judges of a three judge panel. This system of self-checking and self-accountability within the ICC, the Americans maintain, could lead to politically motivated prosecutions. Such a possibility is not hard to imagine.

Independence from the United Nations

The International Criminal Court was created independent from the structure of the United Nations in order to remove the selective nature of the process by which international criminals were brought to justice. Jason Ralph writes: “The problem of ‘selectivity’ – justice was dependent on the will of the Security Council, in particular the permanent powers – created a powerful incentive to create a permanent court independent of the society of states.”
Before the ICC, it was the responsibility of sovereign states to prosecute or extradite those who are accused of committing a core crime, or the UN Security Council could create an international tribunal to act where the states were unable or unwilling to act; “with the creation of the ICC, perpetrators of core crimes can be brought to justice with minimal state involvement.”

To some, this independence from the United Nations is a necessity for justice to be served. To others, like the United States, this independence results in unchecked and unbalanced power for the court which opens it for abuses such as politically motivated prosecutions. Marc Grossman remarks: “in the rush to create a powerful and independent court in Rome, there was a refusal to constrain the Court’s powers in any meaningful way.” This American requirement of checks and balances is so deeply entrenched in its democratic process that it would not easily – if at all – be done away with. Henry Kissinger writes: “It may be possible to negotiate modifications of the present statute to make the ICC more compatible with U.S. constitutional practice. But in its present form of assigning the ultimate dilemmas of international politics to unelected jurist – and to an international judiciary at that – it represents [a] fundamental change in U.S. constitutional practice.” This constitutional practice that he speaks of is the interpretation of the rule of law as the result or consequence of the will of the American people, codified in the American constitution. The threat that the ICC presents to this practice is to remove the will of the American people from the rule of law. Because it is not accountable to any governing body (such as the UN), the ICC is therefore not accountable to the American people (as the United States Government is). A democratic deficit is created.

It can be argued that the ICC is in fact accountable to the United Nations through Article 16 of the Rome Statute. This allows for the United Nations Security Council to stop an investigation or prosecution by deferring it through a UN Resolution adapted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations for a renewable period of one year. In response to this, Henry Kissinger writes: “Since revoking an indictment is subject to the veto of any permanent Security Council member, and since the prosecutor is unlikely to issue an indictment without the backing of at least one permanent member of the Security Council, [the prosecutor] has virtually unlimited discretion.” He argues that while this allowance is provided for in the statute, in practice, it is essentially of no use. It is interesting then to note that the United States has in fact already taken advantage of this clause.

At the insistence of the United States (in fact, a threat to veto the renewal of the Security Council mission to in Bosnia ), the UN Security Council passed Resolutions 1422 and 1487, which formally requested, under Article 16, that the ICC refrain from any prosecutions or investigations relating to any UN established or authorized operation. Another resolution, Resolution 1497, which was a passed in response to the situation in Liberia in 2003, does not even make a request under Article 16 but rather assigns exclusive jurisdiction to the contributing states over the actions of their personnel, seemingly usurping the authority of the ICC. In this instance, there is no time limit specified, as would have been required by Article 16.

These case studies would seem disprove Henry Kissinger’s argument that the deferral clause of the Rome Statute is essentially useless; however, this situation is entirely different from the one that he had presented. In these cases, the resolutions adopted were passed before an investigation could even be launched by the ICC. In Kissinger’s situation, the ICC would have already initiated an investigation, and it would have been the responsibility of the Security Council, should it have found that the investigation interferes with its mission under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, to stop it. No such case has yet presented itself, and so it would be difficult to say whether or not this problem would arise.

While it is extremely unlikely that something like the ICC could be used as a forum to settle political vendettas, the truth is that such a possibility does exist despite Article 16’s attempt creating accountability for the court. Paul Kahn writes: “Supporters of the International Criminal Court seem to think that the invocation of law is a kind of trump to politics.” This could be true in an ideal world; though unfortunately, ideal is not the world that we live in. And more often than not, politics has a tendency, especially at this level, to seep its way in to even the firmest of laws and treaties. As Henry Kissinger writes: “It would be ironic if a doctrine designed to transcend the political process turns into a means to pursue political enemies rather than universal justice.”

The removal of the ICC from the framework of the United Nations is impractical and could even be a little dangerous as its mission could become distorted by the drama of international politics. At the very least, the authority of the United Nations Security Council should be reaffirmed by allow it a more direct responsibility in providing a check for the authority of the Prosecutors and Judges. This would not only ease the concerns of the Americans, but also legitimizes the mission of the ICC by making it accountable to the international community.

Limitations and Conclusions

There are many more issues within the bureaucratic and procedural realms inside the International Criminal Court that simply could not be addressed in this paper. These issues include, but are not limited to, defining the crime of aggression and the opt-out option for party states. These issues were certainly connected to the larger problems of the democratic deficit in the ICC, and the definition of its universal jurisdiction, but space constraint just did not allow their exploration.

It should also be noted that an argument was presented that contained the ever controversial issue of the veto powers of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. The United States argued that the veto power could be abused by a permanent member of the council to allow a politically motivated prosecution to proceed while taking advantage of this power themselves in order to pursue their own agenda in dealing with the ICC. This paper does not make any attempts to resolve this issue, as veto powers are a separate and equally complex problem. It would of course be profitable to explore the relationship of the veto powers with the ICC, especially when dealing with the specifics of how the ICC should become more accountable to the United Nations.

On that note, this paper dealt largely with the “whys” of this issue, rather than the “how’s.” An attempt has not been made to show how the ICC should make itself more accountable to the international community, but rather, why it should do so.

It was quite easy to establish that the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, contrary to American arguments, does indeed have legal precedent to be considered legitimate. The ICC derives its right to prosecute core crimes from the right of sovereign states do just that. Then, on becoming a party to the treaty, the states transfer this right to the Court, enabling the ICC to act on its behalf without its specific permission for every single issue.

The problem that arises with this jurisdiction is when the term “universal” is applied. This tends to suggest that the authority of the ICC is limitless, possibly allowing Prosecutors and Judges the freedom to pursue their own agenda, which can lead to politically motivated prosecutions. This also raises the issue of the democratic deficit that is created when the ICC is removed from the authority and accountability of the United Nations.

This removal from the established international community is a direct contradiction of the democratic practices of nations like the United States of America, which is arguably the most powerful nation in the world. This contradiction against American democracy could very well be the biggest roadblock preventing the International Criminal Court from emerging as a truly legitimate source of justice against transgressors of core crimes.

By separating the will of the American people from the rule of law, the ICC should not expect to gain any allies in the American government. Two presidents from opposing ends of the political spectrum have already rejected the treaty: Clinton, a democrat; and Bush, a republican. It is clear that the problem is not even one of politics, but of democracy. In order for the ICC to become truly legitimized, it must gain support from the Americans. In order for the ICC to gain support from the Americans, it must subject itself to the accountability of the international community, so as to restore some sort of democratic link from the people to the organization. Otherwise, it will remain constricted by the same political manoeuvrings that it was supposed to transcend in the first place.

The irony is that the ICC must submit itself to the authority of the United Nations Security Council, in order for it to be truly become independent of the Council’s political nature. Only when the ICC is accountable to the international community will it become truly legitimized. And only then will the ICC be able to freely pursue its mission of bringing justice to mankind.

Sources

• International Criminal Court: Historical Introduction. 14 November 2005: (http://www.icc-cpi.int/about/ataglance/history.html)
• Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 5: Paragraph 1. 14 November 2005: (http://www.un.org/law/icc/statute/romefra.htm)
• Fact Sheet: The International Criminal Court. 6 May 2002. US Mission to the European Union. 14 November 2005: (http://www.useu.be/Categories/Justice%20and%20Home%20Affairs/May0602ICCFactSheet.html)
• Grossman, Marc. American Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court. 6 May 2002. US Department of State. 17 March 2006: (http://www.state.gov/p/9949.htm)
• Schabas, William A. 2001. An Introduction to the International Criminal Court. Cambridge: University Press.
• Duffy, Helen. 1998. Justice in Balance. New York: Human Rights Watch.
• Kissinger, Henry. 1998. The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction. Foreign Affairs Vol. 80, No. 4.
• Ralph, Jason. 2005. International society, the International Criminal Court and American Foreign Policy. Review of International Studies Vol. 30, No. 1. 28.
• Kahn, Paul W. Why the United States is so Opposed. December 2003. The International Criminal Court. 17 March 2006: (http://www.crimesofwar.org/icc_magazine/icc-kahn.html)

Another paper that I was able to really express my faith in an academic setting. This paper was alright too, but I admit, was a little rushed.

The Function of Religion as Exemplified by the Christian Faith
By Chris Evangelista, April 6, 2005
Lorraine Vanderhoef
RLG101Y1, The Phenomenon of ReligionThe importance of religion in one’s life varies from individual to individual. For some it may play a greater, to others a lesser, role in their human experience. But no matter what level of devotion one might have to religion, it most often functions as a drive to perform works and actions. To followers of the Christian faith, this action for some can be as simple as regularly attending weekly services. But to others, it can become an overwhelming way of life that dictates much of their actions and decisions.

Clifford Geertz touches on this idea in his definition of religion: “Religion is: (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men.” In this definition, Geertz describes both the source and the function of religion. Religion is a system of symbols or a system of belief that has a specific meaning to a group of people. These symbols are then what incite followers to action. Daniel Pals, explaining Geertz’s definition of religion puts it this way: “When it is said, secondly, that these symbols ‘establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations,’ we can abbreviate this by saying that religion makes people feel things and also want to do things.” This function of religion as motivation for action is perhaps most conflicted by Karl Marx’s theory of religion.

In Marx’s explanation, religion is a means for the oppressed to find comfort in their condition. It is equitable to a narcotic drug that provides an escape from present reality while on the contrary, it actually serves to further imprison the oppressed in their current situation. Pals, explaining Marx’s theory writes: “For him (Marx), belief in God and in some heavenly salvation is not just an illusion; it is an illusion that paralyzes and imprisons. It paralyzes workers by drawing off into fantasy the very motives of anger and frustration they need to organize a revolt.” Marx simply believes that the opposite is true of religion, that instead of motivating believers into action, religion actually paralyzes them into inaction. His view of religion is a cynical one that is based on a larger complaint about economic states and the alienation of individuals. Pals writes: “The alienation we see in religion is, in actuality, just the expression of our more basic unhappiness, which is always economic.”

While Marx’s theory would seem to disagree with Geertz’s, it can actually be argued that Geertz’s theory can in fact be applied to Marx’s. The mood and motivation created by religion can be equated to this “paralyzing” effect that Marx vehemently condemns. This is because Marx’s idea that the effect is paralyzing is based entirely on the premise that people are unhappy with the current economic state, and thus requires an escape from their reality. It can be viewed differently in that the effect is actually a motivation to endure, rather than an imprisoning alienation.

In the Christian faith, the system of symbols is that of the person of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross, which therefore allows believers to be redeemed and reconciled with God. It is this belief system that then motivates believers to work and act in worship to God. Performing works because of the faith one professes can almost be seen as a requirement in Christianity. All throughout the Bible, many examples are found of people motivated into action by their religion.

The Old Testament is an easy source to find such examples. At this time, as Jesus Christ had not been born yet, system of symbols was found in the religious tradition held by the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This tradition began with Yahweh’s promise to Abraham, to make him into a mighty nation and to give him the land of Canaan. It is after this promise that we see an excellent example of an action motivated by the religious symbol. Yahweh would ask Abraham to the land he was living in, even though he was very prosperous, and to go where God instructs him to go. Abraham’s actions would eventually lead to the slavery of the Israelites in Egypt, to their exodus and their wandering in the desert. Finally, under Moses’ leadership, the Law is handed down by God, which contains the instructions of how the Israelites were to live their daily lives. In it, God admonishes his people many times to act according to his will. In Deuteronomy, it is written: “I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgements, that you may live and multiply, and that the Lord your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it.” In this passage, Moses is instructing the Israelites to follow the law that God had given, which is the action motivated by their system of symbols. This law was very comprehensive, and controlled many aspects of the Israelite’s daily lives. But God’s promise to Abraham, not only to make him a great nation but also to give him the land of Canaan (known as “the Promised Land”), resurfaces, and again becomes the motivation for the Israelites to act in worship and service of God.

The Israelites would fail, however, and would not be able to keep this Law, turning again and again away from God. Eventually, their failure would be so bad that God would allow them to be first to be removed from the Promised Land, then to be allowed to return, subjected to the rule of another nation. In the New Testament, the system of symbols shifts to Jesus Christ and his work to restore salvation on the earth. This becomes possible because Jesus would live the perfect existence, free of sin, and therefore fulfilling the Law that the Israelites could not keep.

As the new system of symbols for this new religion that would in the future be called Christianity, Jesus Christ would motivate his followers in a slightly different way that the tradition of the Israelites had before. As he had already fulfilled the law, Jesus would require a different kind of dedication than had been of the Israelites. Gone were the rituals of the law, as a new law, one of faith and grace would be introduced: “For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin. He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” This faith and grace would be characterized by “walking according to the Spirit,” that is, by accepting Jesus’ Salvation.

It is at this point, however, where a different view on works and actions are introduced. There are those who would argue that “religious works,” that is, those works motivated by “religion” are of no value in light of Salvation found in Jesus Christ. Many would use the apostle Paul’s letter to the church in Ephesus as their argument for this point: “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. ”

This argument would see “religious works” vilified as it is fervently argued that only the works of Jesus Christ count for salvation. According to Christian belief, this is true as only Jesus is indeed capable of giving salvation. However, the argument being presented here is that religion motivates actions, not actions provide salvation. Too often, this distinction is lost as people would rush to condemn “works” as taking away from “salvation.”

But the distinction is clear as both statements are true: that salvation is only attained by grace, and that religion does produce works. In the book of James, evidence is found to support the original argument: “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says, he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? … Even so, faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.” Yet another often debated passage of scripture, this verse goes so far as to state that faith, without works is dead, and useless. The argument is continued in the next verse: “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” The simple principle in this passage is that faith, or religion, is revealed by works. Without faith, there is no works, but without works, faith is hard to see or probably does not exist either. In this sense, it is then a requirement that religion be able to produce works, because it is by these works that religion is even made known.

This principle is seen clearly in the life of Hudson Taylor, a late 19th century missionary to China. He would endure much hardship during his long years abroad, including the death of a daughter and his wife. But throughout this time, it would be his religion – his faith – that would motivate him: “He had given himself to God. His offering had been accepted. And though he did not know for what special service the Lord had need of him, he knew that he was no longer his own and must be ready for the call whenever it might come. One result of this definite consecration is that he began to care about the welfare of others. Hitherto he had been concerned chiefly with his own growth in grace; now he must be about his Master’s business which was the salvation of those around him. “This passage demonstrates how from the beginning, Hudson Taylor immediately sensed the influence of his newfound faith. He would learn to sacrifice some of the simple pleasures that he had once enjoyed. It also addresses the issue of faith, or religion, producing the works that would eventually lead back to it. Hudson Taylor would be “about his Master’s business”, that is, doing the works from religion, that he claims would eventually lead to the salvation of those around him.

Eventually, Hudson Taylor’s faith would find him preparing to go to China. Even at the young age of seventeen, Taylor would begin his preparation to go, that can only be attributed to the faith he had within him: “I have begun to get up at five in the morning and so find it necessary to go to bed early at night. I must study if I mean to go to China.” Taylor’s conviction would overtake his life, as he prepared to move to China. He would move away from his comfortable home and live in poverty. Then even in this poverty, he would continue to find a way to give to those in need around him. Taylor’s faith and works would see fruit. By the time of his death in 1905, his mission, the China Inland Mission would have more than 200 stations in inland China, with over 800 missionaries, and 125 000 Chinese Christians serving the missions.

Hudson Taylor is an excellent example of the works that are motivated by religion. Even through the death of his daughter, his wife, and in his loneliest hours while separated from his family, Taylor would continue to endure, holding fast to his faith. He would even find time to preach to his children even only through letters: “I wish you, my precious children, knew what it was to give your hears to Jesus to keep every day. I used to try to keep my own heart right, but it would be always going wrong; and so at last I had to give up trying myself, and accept Jesus’ offer to keep it for me.” Even in his darkest times, Hudson Taylor can see how the motivation of his religion and faith continues to work in his life and to give him strength to keep going.

It is clear through these arguments that religion plays a significant role in someone’s life, no matter how much significance he or she actually puts on religion. Geertz’s argument is that religion is a motivation for action, and Karl Marx, though in a more cynical way would seem to agree.

Christian theological teachings are also in line with these findings, as it becomes clear that it is the demand of religion, of faith, to produce an action. It is through these actions that the faith is made known to the world. This was exemplified in the life of Hudson Taylor, who exuberates with faith that would guide him through trying times.

Motivation is a necessity for action. Without the motivation of hunger, would we eat? It is therefore not a surprise that religion can function as motivation as well. This paper was obviously limited to that end, and thus did not seek to explore other functions of religion. The paper also exclusively used the Christian religion as examples, but for a good reason. Within the Christian faith, there is much debate about the importance of works and actions in the Christian life. As mentioned before, there are those who would condemn “human works” as unnecessary, and counter productive to the gospel of Jesus Christ. As it was explored through various passages, it becomes clear that just the opposite is true, that it is through works that faith, or religion, in effect is proven when these works are properly sourced in religion – that is in faith, in this case, in Jesus Christ.

Sources
• Pals, Daniel L. “Religion as Cultural Systems: Clifford Geertz.” In Seven Theories of Religion (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996), 233 – 267.
• ___ . “Religion as Alienation: Karl Marx.” In Seven Theories of Religion (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996), 124-157.
• Taylor, Dr. and Mrs. Howard. The Spiritual Secret of Hudson Taylor (New Kensington, PA: Witaker House, 1996).

I know for sure that I had heard Appalachian Spring before. But I didn’t know where – it was just a vague memory in my head. So when I heard it again in this class, I knew I couldn’t let it slip. I bought a copy of it online, and then wrote my final term paper on it.

From what I remember (I try to remember little from that class… lol) I did actually pretty bad on this paper. Even though it was one of my favourite ones from my first year in University. But whatever. I had fun.

The Essence of Appalachian Spring
By Chris Evangelista, November 24, 2005
Prof. Gregory S. Johnston
MUS110H1, Music History & Culture

Appalachian Spring was written by Aaron Copland in October 1944. Original written as a ballet score for a thirteen-member chamber orchestra, Copland later arranged the piece as a full orchestral suite. Copland would receive the 1945 Pulitzer Prize for Music for the ballet piece; however, it is arguable that it was for the orchestral suite that Copland truly became popular . The piece has eight sections; of which, sections 1, 2, 7 are analyzed in this essay.

The piece is organized in sections that are supposed to convey a different part of the ballet’s story. These sections are different from each other in form as they fulfil the purpose for which they were written. The first section is the introduction to the ballet and is one long overture that does not repeat many melodic ideas. The second section has what seems to be a theme with one variation. Finally, the seventh section is a theme and with four variations. The variations found in these two sections are generally changes in the texture and timbres of the original theme. In the seventh section, there is also a variation in the tempo and rhythm in some of the repeats of the melodic theme.

Though there is a lack of percussion instruments, except for faintly heard Timpani and possibly a triangle, there is still for the most part, an identifiable rhythm running through Appalachian Spring. In the first section, the rhythm is set by the melodic line and is rather weak – weak enough that at times, the metre is obscured. The level of activity is low, and the tempo is slow. In the second section, the level of rhythmic activity immediately rises as a dance-like feel and tempo emerges. The metre is now very obvious, with the beat being kept mostly by the string section, whether it is playing the melody line or the accompaniment to the woodwinds. In the seventh section, the rhythm and metre is still dance-like, and the responsibility for keeping the beat falling back on the melody line. For most of the section, the tempo and rhythmic activity of the melody is high. Although, in the third and last repeat of the melody, the tempo is cut in half as is the rhythm of the melody line. In the third repeat, the accompanying instruments compensate for this by increasing their activity; but in the last repeat, there is no compensation as all of the instruments play the final climactic lines.

The harmony and texture are elements that help make up an essence for the piece that makes it so pleasant and appealing. The harmonies of all three sections are mostly consonant, simple and complete. The harmony moves slowly in the first section, but as with the rhythm and melody, begins to pick up in the third and seventh sections. The texture varies much in density and timbre. Some of the time, the full polyphonic force and density of the orchestra is felt, while other times it can be transparent with only one or two instruments playing. The timbre is mostly composed of bright polyphonic sounds, combining the richness of the strings, the sweetness of the woodwinds, and the grandeur of the brass. The variations in texture and timbre are ever present in the whole piece, though it is epitomized in the seventh section. In this section, each variation of the melody is a progression of the density of the texture. It is first played by the clarinet and an accompanying flute; then, it is played by an oboe and a bassoon; then it is played by a combination of the brass and strings, and is followed by the brass alone; finally, the last variation is played by the entire orchestra.

The melodies in Appalachian Spring very much convey musically the images of the rural life that the ballet was about. While the melodies vary between the sections, there exists between these different melodies a commonality that is helpful in binding the piece together. It is not one specific melody but rather a type of melody that, when combined with the different harmonies and the texture of the piece, creates the essence of the piece. The melody moves in mostly disjunct motion and generally ranges about an octave. In the first section, the melody is a slow-moving introductory that is pleasing to hear. There is little repetition of motives, as it is all in one smooth, flowing unit. It expresses beginnings: the tranquility of dawn; the serenity of a new life. The second section immediately builds on this, the melody springing into action. It is suddenly fast-paced, filled with activity and movement. In this section, there seems to be a little bit of dissonance in dance-like melody of the strings especially when contrasted with the sweetness and calmness that is retained by the melody of the trumpets. In the seventh section, another melody is introduced that balances out the previous sections. This melody is borrowed from a collection of “Shaker” melodies that were compiled by Edward D. Andrews. It is not as slow as the first section, and not as hectic as the second section; its expression is calm, but also full of activity.

None of the elements of music can claim dominance as the unifying factor of this piece. There is no common melody, no distinctive harmonies, or no overbearing texture or timbre combinations that sets this piece apart from others. Rather, the essence that binds this piece together is in the ambiance that is created in order to accompany the ballet. This is expressed by the sheer simplicity of the piece, which Copland specifically designed to be uncomplicated in order to appeal to ordinary citizens. This simplicity unifies the elements of this piece together and also makes it likeable to audiences.

This essence is what some might call “the American Sound”, though that is not really very descriptive nor is it truly reflective of the emotions found in this piece. A better analogy might be that of the “American Dream”, for the essence that is conveyed in Appalachian Spring is the peace and serenity of life, the beauty of creation, and the dignity of a job well done.

Sources
• Wright, Craig. Listening to Music: Fourth Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth Group. 2004. 386- 389.
• Appalachian Spring. Wikipedia.com, 27 October 2005. 10 November 2005: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Spring).