Online Scholarship

Online Scholarship

Free and Fair Elections, Violence and Conflict

Introduction*

Elections are a defining characteristic of democracy, and thus form an integral part of the democratization process.  Over the past decade, electoral systems and processes have become a centerpiece of UN peacekeeping missions and post-conflict democratization projects undertaken by intergovernmental organizations and donor agencies such as World Bank and USAID. The emphasis on elections as an element of UN peacekeeping missions is linked to a shift in focus to state rebuilding (or state creation, as was the case in East Timor).  Elections thus provide a means for “jump-starting a new, post-conflict political order; for stimulating the development of democratic politics; for choosing representatives; for forming governments; and for conferring legitimacy upon the new political order.”

Recent election-related violence in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Kenya, and Zimbabwe have led some to question whether elections reduce the risk of conflict and in fact lead to stability, democracy, peace and development. For example, Havard Hegre and Hanne Fjelde have recently argued that there is no evidence that post-war elections reduce conflict in the short term, but rather that electoral processes are associated with heightened risk of civil war.  Such violence is often attributed to a lack of “security” before elections take place.  There is thus an arguably growing view that security should be the dispositive pre-requisite for the organization of postconflict elections.

…

* This excerpt does not include citations. To read the entire article, including supporting notes, please download the PDF.

Student Features

WTO Jurisprudence & Its Critiques

Abstract

In a time of financial crisis and rising demand for economic protectionism, the World Trade Organization, promoting free trade and economic growth, has never been more important. Enforcement of the WTO’s provisions has grown increasingly contentious and high-stakes, and the Appellate Body empowered to rule on violations of the treaty has received harsh criticism. Three elements of WTO jurisprudence, in particular, stand out. First, the court’s excessive use of narrow textualist argument tends to lead to short-sighted decisions that give little guidance to member states. Second, the court’s decisions have increasingly interfered with sensitive democratic processes in sovereign countries. Third, the opinions handed down by the court have led countries to adopt trade-restrictive, rather than trade-liberalizing, measures. These criticisms of WTO jurisprudence present serious challenges to the very raison d’être of the WTO. This jurisprudence cannot be explained without reference to the AB’s history as an institution awkwardly positioned somewhere between the realm of diplomacy and law. This Article will argue that the WTO’s jurisprudence can be usefully understood as a kind of resistance to constitutionalization in international trade law. The narrow textualism of the AB was intended to reduce the amount of contestation and politics at the WTO, but, paradoxically, the AB’s resistance to constitutionalization has actually created the very controversy and division that it seeks to avoid.

Online Scholarship

Identitarian Violence and Identitarian Politics

Introduction*

Over the past few years, I have observed numerous commentators, pundits, and self-appointed experts of nearly every political stripe describe their views on whether or not the U.S. was wise to have “allowed” early elections in Iraq.  Generally the answer to the question tends to lie in the affirmative among defenders of the Bush administration, and in the negative among its detractors.  After living in Iraq for nearly four cumulative years following the fall of the Saddam regime, it appears to me that any cogent response to the question is far more nuanced than the yes or no answer it seems designed to solicit.

Nevertheless, I offer this skeletal answer, the basis of which I will seek to explain in this Essay: This is the wrong question to ask.  The question, rather, should be, to the extent that early elections take place in Iraq, what is it that the U.S. and the international community might do to limit any civil conflict that might arise as a result, and what are the costs associated with any such policy?

…

* This excerpt does not include citations. To read the entire article, including supporting notes, please download the PDF.

Scroll to Top