fbpx
Wikipedia

Kellogg–Briand Pact

April 08, 2024

The Kellogg–Briand Pact or Pact of Paris – officially the General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy[1] – is a 1928 international agreement on peace in which signatory states promised not to use war to resolve "disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them".[2] The pact was signed by Germany, France, and the United States on 27 August 1928, and by most other states soon after. Sponsored by France and the U.S., the Pact is named after its authors, United States Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg and French foreign minister Aristide Briand. The pact was concluded outside the League of Nations and remains in effect.[3]

Kellogg–Briand Pact
General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy
Kellogg–Briand Pact with signatures
Signed27 August 1928
LocationQuai d'Orsay, Paris, France
Effective24 July 1929 (1929-07-24)
Negotiators
Parties
31 signatories by effective date
25 countries once in force
Full text
Kellogg-Briand Treaty at Wikisource

A common criticism is that the Kellogg–Briand Pact did not live up to all of its aims but has arguably had some success.[4] It was unable to prevent the Second World War but was the basis for trial and execution of wartime German leaders in 1946. Furthermore, declared wars became very rare after 1945.[5] It has been ridiculed for its moralism, legalism, and lack of influence on foreign policy. The pact had no mechanism for enforcement, and many historians and political scientists see it as mostly irrelevant and ineffective.[6] Nevertheless, the pact served as the legal basis for the concept of a crime against peace, for which the Nuremberg Tribunal and Tokyo Tribunal tried and executed the top leaders responsible for starting World War II.[7][8]

Similar provisions to those in the Kellogg–Briand Pact were later incorporated into the Charter of the United Nations and other treaties, which gave rise to a more activist American foreign policy which began with the signing of the pact.[9]

Text edit

The main text is very short:[2]

Article I

The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies and renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.

Article II

The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific means.

Parties edit

 
  Original signatories
  Subsequent adherents
  Territories of parties
  League of Nations mandates administered by parties

The plan was devised by American lawyers Salmon Levinson and James T. Shotwell, and promoted by Senator William E. Borah.[10]

Borah and U.S. diplomat William Richards Castle Jr., Assistant Secretary of State, played key roles after Kellogg and Briand agreed on a two party treaty between the U.S. and France.[11] It was originally intended as a bilateral treaty, but Castle worked to expand it to a multinational agreement that included practically the entire world. Castle managed to overcome French objections through his discussions with the French ambassador, replacing the narrow Franco-American agreement with a treaty that attracted almost all major and minor nations.[12]

The pact was first signed on 27 August 1928 in Paris at the French Foreign Ministry by the representatives from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, the Irish Free State, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, and the United States. It took effect on 24 July 1929.

By that date, the following nations had deposited instruments of ratification of the pact:

12 additional parties joined after that date: Persia, Greece, Honduras, Chile, Luxembourg, Danzig, Costa Rica, Mexico, Venezuela, Paraguay, Switzerland and the Dominican Republic[2] for a total of 57 state parties by 1929. Six states joined between 1930 and 1934: Haiti, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Iraq and Brazil. After the Second World War, Barbados declared its accession to the treaty in 1971,[13] followed by Fiji (1973), Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica (both 1988), the Czech Republic and Slovakia (after Czechoslovakia dissolved in 1993), and, as a result of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Slovenia (1992), Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia (both in 1994).[14] The Free City of Danzig, which had joined the Pact in 1929, ceased to exist in 1939 and became a regular part of Poland after World War II.

In the United States, the Senate approved the treaty 85–1, with only Wisconsin Republican John J. Blaine voting against over concerns with British imperialism.[15] While the U.S. Senate did not add any reservations to the treaty, it did pass a measure which interpreted the treaty as not infringing upon the United States' right of self-defense and not obliging the nation to enforce it by taking action against those who violated it.[16]


Effect and legacy edit

The 1928 Kellogg–Briand Pact was concluded outside the League of Nations and remains in effect.[3] One month following its conclusion, a similar agreement, the General Act for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, was concluded in Geneva, which obliged its signatory parties to establish conciliation commissions in any case of dispute.[17] With the signing of the Litvinov Protocol in Moscow on February 9, 1929, the Soviet Union and its western neighbors, including Romania, agreed to put the Kellogg–Briand Pact in effect without waiting for other western signatories to ratify.[18] The Bessarabian question had made agreement between Romania and the Soviet Union challenging and dispute between the nations over Bessarabia continued.[19][20] The pact's central provisions renouncing the use of war, and promoting peaceful settlement of disputes and the use of collective force to prevent aggression, were incorporated into the United Nations Charter and other treaties. Although civil wars continued, wars between established states have been rare since 1945, with a few major exceptions such as the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and various conflicts in the Middle East.[9]

As a practical matter, the Kellogg–Briand Pact did not live up to its primary aims, but has arguably had some success. It did not end war or stop the rise of militarism, and was unable to keep the international peace in succeeding years. Its legacy remains as a statement of the idealism expressed by advocates for peace in the interwar period.[21] However, it also helped to erase the legal distinction between war and peace, because the signatories, having renounced the use of war, began to wage wars without declaring them, as in the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in 1935, the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939, and the German and Soviet invasions of Poland.[22]

 
Mockery of the Pact during the Paris Carnival in 1929

The popular perception of the Kellogg–Briand Pact was best summarized by Eric Sevareid who, in a nationally televised series on American diplomacy between the two world wars, referred to the pact as a "worthless piece of paper".[9] In his history of Europe from 1914 to 1948, historian Ian Kershaw referred to the Pact as "vacuous" and said that it was "a dead letter from the moment it was signed."[23]

While the Pact has been ridiculed for its moralism and legalism and lack of influence on foreign policy, it did lead to a more activist American foreign policy.[9] Legal scholars Scott J. Shapiro and Oona A. Hathaway have argued that the Pact inaugurated "a new era of human history" characterized by the decline of inter-state war as a structuring dynamic of the international system. According to Shapiro and Hathaway one reason for the historical insignificance of the pact was the absence of an enforcement mechanism to compel compliance from signatories, since the pact only calls for violators to "be denied of the benefits furnished by [the] treaty". They also said that the Pact appealed to the West because it promised to secure and protect previous conquests, thus securing their place at the head of the international legal order indefinitely.[24] They wrote in 2017:

As its effects reverberated across the globe, it reshaped the world map, catalyzed the human rights revolution, enabled the use of economic sanctions as a tool of law enforcement, and ignited the explosion in the number of international organizations that regulate so many aspects of our daily lives.[25][26]

Hathaway and Shapiro show that between 1816 and 1928 there was on average one military conquest every ten months. After 1945, in very sharp contrast, the number of such conflicts declined to one in every four years.[27]

The pact, in addition to binding the particular nations that signed it, has also served as one of the legal bases establishing the international norms that the threat[28] or use of military force in contravention of international law, as well as the territorial acquisitions resulting from it,[29] are unlawful. The interdiction of aggressive war was confirmed and broadened by the United Nations Charter, which provides in article 2, paragraph 4, that "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." One legal consequence is that it is unlawful to annex territory by force, although other forms of annexation have not been prevented. More broadly, there is now a strong presumption against the legality of using, or threatening, military force against another country. Nations that have resorted to the use of force since the Charter came into effect have typically invoked self-defense or the right of collective defense.[30]

Notably, the pact also served as the legal basis for the concept of a crime against peace. It was for committing this crime that the Nuremberg Tribunal and Tokyo Tribunal tried and executed the top leaders responsible for starting World War II.[7]

Political scientists Julie Bunck and Michael Fowler in 2018 argued that the Pact was:

an important early venture in multilateralism. ... [I]nternational law evolved to circumscribe the use of armed force with legal restrictions. The forcible acquisition of territory by conquest became illegitimate and individual criminal liability might attach to those who pursued it. In criminalizing war Kellogg–Briand played a role in the development of a new norm of behavior in international relations, a norm that continues to play a role in our current international order.[31]

See also edit

References edit

Notes

  1. ^ See certified true copy of the text of the treaty in League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 94, p. 57 (No. 2137)
  2. ^ a b c Kellogg–Briand Pact 1928, Yale University
  3. ^ a b Westminster, Department of the Official Report (Hansard), House of Commons. "House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 16 Dec 2013 (pt 0004)". publications.parliament.uk.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. ^ Marsh, Norman S. (1963). "Book Reviews". International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 12 (3): 1049–1050. doi:10.1093/iclqaj/12.3.1049. ISSN 0020-5893.
  5. ^ Bunck, Julie M., and Michael R. Fowler. "The Kellogg-Briand Pact: A Reappraisal". Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 27, no. 2, Spring 2019, pp. 229–276. HeinOnline.
  6. ^ "There's Still No Reason to Think the Kellogg-Briand Pact Accomplished Anything". Foreign Policy. 29 September 2017. Retrieved 29 December 2017.
  7. ^ a b Kelly Dawn Askin (1997). War Crimes Against Women: Prosecution in International War Crimes Tribunals. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 46. ISBN 978-9041104861.
  8. ^ Binoy Kampmark, "Punishing wars of aggression: conceptualising Nazi State criminality and the US policy behind shaping the crime against peace, 1943–1945." War & Society (2018) 37#1 pp. 38–56.
  9. ^ a b c d Josephson, Harold (1979). "Outlawing War: Internationalism and the Pact of Paris". Diplomatic History. 3 (4): 377–390. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7709.1979.tb00323.x.
  10. ^ Oona A. Hathaway, and Scott J. Shapiro, The Internationalists: How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World (2017) p. xxi, 114.
  11. ^ Charles DeBenedetti, "Borah and the Kellogg-Briand Pact." Pacific Northwest Quarterly 63.1 (1972): 22–29.
  12. ^ Robert H. Ferrell, Peace in Their Time: The Origins of the Kellogg-Briand Pact (Yale University Press, 1952) pp. 140–143.
  13. ^ "UNTC". treaties.un.org.
  14. ^ "US Department of State" (PDF). state.gov.
  15. ^ "John James Blaine 11 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine". Dictionary of Wisconsin History. Accessed 11 November 2008.
  16. ^ "The Avalon Project : The Kellogg-Briand Pact – Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Relations United States". avalon.law.yale.edu.
  17. ^ Text in League of Nations Treaty Series, vol. 93, pp. 344–363.
  18. ^ Deletant, Dennis (2006). Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonsecu and his Regime, Romania, 1940–1944. Springer. ISBN 0230502091. Retrieved 7 August 2019.
  19. ^ von Rauch, Georg (1962). A History of Soviet Russia. Praeger. p. 208. Retrieved 8 August 2019.
  20. ^ King, Charles (2013). The Moldovans: Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture. Hoover Institution Press. p. 39. ISBN 978-0817997939. Retrieved 8 August 2019.
  21. ^ "Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian". history.state.gov.
  22. ^ Quigley, Carroll (1966). Tragedy And Hope. New York: Macmillan. pp. 294–295.
  23. ^ Kershaw, Ian (2016). To Hell and Back: Europe 1914–1949. New York: Penguin Books. p. 181. ISBN 978-0-14-310992-1.
  24. ^ Menand, Louis (18 September 2017). "Drop Your Weapons". The New Yorker. Condé Nast.
  25. ^ Hathaway, Oona A.; Shapiro, Scott J. (2017). The Internationalists: How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World. Simon and Schuster. p. xv. ISBN 978-1-5011-0986-7.
  26. ^ For detailed discussion by several scholars see [H-Diplo ROUNDTABLE XXI-15 "https://issforum.org/roundtables/PDF/Roundtable-XXI-15.pdf"]
  27. ^ Hathaway and Shapiro, The Internationalists pp 311–335.
  28. ^ Article 2, Budapest Articles of Interpretation 25 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine (see under footnotes), 1934
  29. ^ Article 5, Budapest Articles of Interpretation 25 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine (see under footnotes), 1934
  30. ^ Silke Marie Christiansen (2016). Climate Conflicts – A Case of International Environmental and Humanitarian Law. Springer. p. 153. ISBN 978-3319279459.
  31. ^ Julie M. Bunck, and Michael R. Fowler. "The Kellogg-Briand Pact: A Reappraisal." Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 27 #2(2018): 229–276 online

Bibliography

  • Bunck, Julie M., and Michael R. Fowler. "The Kellogg-Briand Pact: A Reappraisal." Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 27 #2(2018): 229–276 online, a major scholarly survey.
  • Carroll, Francis M. "War and Peace and International Law: The Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact Reconsidered." Canadian Journal of History (2018) 53#1 : 86–96.
  • Cavendish, Richard. "The Kellogg–Briand Pact Aims to Bring an End to War". History Today 58.8 (2008): 11+.
  • DeBenedetti, Charles. "Borah and the Kellogg-Briand Pact." The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 63.1 (1972): 22-29.
  • Ellis, Lewis Ethan. Frank B. Kellogg and American foreign relations, 1925–1929 (1961). online
  • Ellis, Lewis Ethan. Republican Foreign Policy, 1921–1933 (1968). online
  • Ferrell, Robert H. (1952). Peace in Their Time: The Origins of the Kellogg-Briand Pact. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0393004915.
  • "H-Diplo Roundtable XXI-15 on The Internationalists" online
  • Hathaway, Oona A. and Shapiro, Scott J. "International law and its transformation through the outlawry of war". International Affairs (2019) 95#1 pp 45–62
  • Hathaway, Oona A., and Scott J. Shapiro. "International law and its transformation through the outlawry of war." International Affairs (2019) 95#1 pp 45-62. Argues for a major impact--that this prohibition is key to understanding international law and state behavior in the last century.
  • Johnson, Gaynor. "Austen Chamberlain and the Negotiation of the Kellogg-Briand Pact, 1928" in Gaynor Johnson, ed. Locarno Revisited: European Diplomacy 1920–1929. (Routledge, 2004) pp 54–67.
  • Jones, E. Stanley. The Pact Of Paris Officially The General Pact For The Renunciation Of War (1929) online
  • Josephson, Harold. "Outlawing war: Internationalism and the Pact of Paris." Diplomatic History 3.4 (1979): 377-390.
  • Kampmark, Binoy. "Punishing wars of aggression: conceptualising Nazi State criminality and the US policy behind shaping the crime against peace, 1943-1945." War & Society (2018) 37#1 pp 38-56.
  • Limberg, Michael. "'In Relation to the Pact': Radical Pacifists and the Kellogg–Briand Pact, 1928–1939". Peace & Change 39.3 (2014): 395–420.
  • Miller, David Hunter. The Pact of Paris—A Study of the Briand-Kellogg Treaty (1928)
  • Shotwell, James T. War as an instrument of national policy : and its renunciation in the pact of Paris (1929) online
  • Swanson, David. When the World Outlawed War (2011).

External links edit

 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Kellogg–Briand Pact (1928).
  •   Works related to Kellogg-Briand Treaty at Wikisource

April 08, 2024
kellogg, briand, pact, this, article, needs, editing, comply, with, wikipedia, manual, style, particular, problems, with, infoboxflag, please, help, improve, content, january, 2024, learn, when, remove, this, template, message, pact, paris, officially, general. This article needs editing to comply with Wikipedia s Manual of Style In particular it has problems with MOS INFOBOXFLAG Please help improve the content January 2024 Learn how and when to remove this template message The Kellogg Briand Pact or Pact of Paris officially the General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy 1 is a 1928 international agreement on peace in which signatory states promised not to use war to resolve disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be which may arise among them 2 The pact was signed by Germany France and the United States on 27 August 1928 and by most other states soon after Sponsored by France and the U S the Pact is named after its authors United States Secretary of State Frank B Kellogg and French foreign minister Aristide Briand The pact was concluded outside the League of Nations and remains in effect 3 Kellogg Briand PactGeneral Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National PolicyKellogg Briand Pact with signaturesSigned27 August 1928LocationQuai d Orsay Paris FranceEffective24 July 1929 1929 07 24 NegotiatorsFrank B Kellogg Secretary of State Aristide Briand Minister of Foreign AffairsParties Australia Belgium Canada Czechoslovakia France Germany India Ireland Italy Japan New Zealand Poland South Africa United Kingdom United States31 signatories by effective date Afghanistan Albania Austria Bulgaria China Cuba Denmark Dominican Republic Egypt Estonia Ethiopian Empire Finland Guatemala Hungary Iceland Latvia Liberia Lithuania Netherlands Nicaragua Norway Panama Peru Portugal Romania Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes Soviet Union Siam Spain Sweden Turkey 25 countries once in force Persia Greece Honduras Hejaz Brazil Chile Luxembourg Free City of Danzig Ecuador Haiti Costa Rica Dominican Republic Iraq Venezuela Mexico Switzerland Paraguay Barbados 1971 Fiji 1973 Antigua and Barbuda 1988 Dominica 1988 Czech Republic 1993 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1994 Croatia 1994 Slovenia 1994 Full textKellogg Briand Treaty at WikisourceA common criticism is that the Kellogg Briand Pact did not live up to all of its aims but has arguably had some success 4 It was unable to prevent the Second World War but was the basis for trial and execution of wartime German leaders in 1946 Furthermore declared wars became very rare after 1945 5 It has been ridiculed for its moralism legalism and lack of influence on foreign policy The pact had no mechanism for enforcement and many historians and political scientists see it as mostly irrelevant and ineffective 6 Nevertheless the pact served as the legal basis for the concept of a crime against peace for which the Nuremberg Tribunal and Tokyo Tribunal tried and executed the top leaders responsible for starting World War II 7 8 Similar provisions to those in the Kellogg Briand Pact were later incorporated into the Charter of the United Nations and other treaties which gave rise to a more activist American foreign policy which began with the signing of the pact 9 Contents 1 Text 2 Parties 3 Effect and legacy 4 See also 5 References 6 External linksText editThe main text is very short 2 Article I The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies and renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another Article II The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be which may arise among them shall never be sought except by pacific means Parties edit nbsp Original signatories Subsequent adherents Territories of parties League of Nations mandates administered by partiesThe plan was devised by American lawyers Salmon Levinson and James T Shotwell and promoted by Senator William E Borah 10 Borah and U S diplomat William Richards Castle Jr Assistant Secretary of State played key roles after Kellogg and Briand agreed on a two party treaty between the U S and France 11 It was originally intended as a bilateral treaty but Castle worked to expand it to a multinational agreement that included practically the entire world Castle managed to overcome French objections through his discussions with the French ambassador replacing the narrow Franco American agreement with a treaty that attracted almost all major and minor nations 12 The pact was first signed on 27 August 1928 in Paris at the French Foreign Ministry by the representatives from Australia Belgium Canada Czechoslovakia France Germany Great Britain India the Irish Free State Italy Japan New Zealand Poland South Africa and the United States It took effect on 24 July 1929 By that date the following nations had deposited instruments of ratification of the pact Afghanistan Albania Austria Bulgaria China Cuba Denmark Egypt Estonia Ethiopia Finland Guatemala Hungary Iceland Latvia Liberia Lithuania Netherlands Nicaragua Norway Panama Peru Portugal Romania Kingdom of the Serbs Croats and Slovenes later Kingdom of Yugoslavia Siam Soviet Union Spain Sweden Turkey 12 additional parties joined after that date Persia Greece Honduras Chile Luxembourg Danzig Costa Rica Mexico Venezuela Paraguay Switzerland and the Dominican Republic 2 for a total of 57 state parties by 1929 Six states joined between 1930 and 1934 Haiti Colombia Saudi Arabia Ecuador Iraq and Brazil After the Second World War Barbados declared its accession to the treaty in 1971 13 followed by Fiji 1973 Antigua and Barbuda Dominica both 1988 the Czech Republic and Slovakia after Czechoslovakia dissolved in 1993 and as a result of the dissolution of Yugoslavia Slovenia 1992 Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia both in 1994 14 The Free City of Danzig which had joined the Pact in 1929 ceased to exist in 1939 and became a regular part of Poland after World War II In the United States the Senate approved the treaty 85 1 with only Wisconsin Republican John J Blaine voting against over concerns with British imperialism 15 While the U S Senate did not add any reservations to the treaty it did pass a measure which interpreted the treaty as not infringing upon the United States right of self defense and not obliging the nation to enforce it by taking action against those who violated it 16 nbsp French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand speaking nbsp German Foreign Minister Gustav Stresemann signing nbsp Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs Mackenzie King signingEffect and legacy editThe 1928 Kellogg Briand Pact was concluded outside the League of Nations and remains in effect 3 One month following its conclusion a similar agreement the General Act for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes was concluded in Geneva which obliged its signatory parties to establish conciliation commissions in any case of dispute 17 With the signing of the Litvinov Protocol in Moscow on February 9 1929 the Soviet Union and its western neighbors including Romania agreed to put the Kellogg Briand Pact in effect without waiting for other western signatories to ratify 18 The Bessarabian question had made agreement between Romania and the Soviet Union challenging and dispute between the nations over Bessarabia continued 19 20 The pact s central provisions renouncing the use of war and promoting peaceful settlement of disputes and the use of collective force to prevent aggression were incorporated into the United Nations Charter and other treaties Although civil wars continued wars between established states have been rare since 1945 with a few major exceptions such as the Indo Pakistani War of 1971 and various conflicts in the Middle East 9 As a practical matter the Kellogg Briand Pact did not live up to its primary aims but has arguably had some success It did not end war or stop the rise of militarism and was unable to keep the international peace in succeeding years Its legacy remains as a statement of the idealism expressed by advocates for peace in the interwar period 21 However it also helped to erase the legal distinction between war and peace because the signatories having renounced the use of war began to wage wars without declaring them as in the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in 1935 the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939 and the German and Soviet invasions of Poland 22 nbsp Mockery of the Pact during the Paris Carnival in 1929The popular perception of the Kellogg Briand Pact was best summarized by Eric Sevareid who in a nationally televised series on American diplomacy between the two world wars referred to the pact as a worthless piece of paper 9 In his history of Europe from 1914 to 1948 historian Ian Kershaw referred to the Pact as vacuous and said that it was a dead letter from the moment it was signed 23 While the Pact has been ridiculed for its moralism and legalism and lack of influence on foreign policy it did lead to a more activist American foreign policy 9 Legal scholars Scott J Shapiro and Oona A Hathaway have argued that the Pact inaugurated a new era of human history characterized by the decline of inter state war as a structuring dynamic of the international system According to Shapiro and Hathaway one reason for the historical insignificance of the pact was the absence of an enforcement mechanism to compel compliance from signatories since the pact only calls for violators to be denied of the benefits furnished by the treaty They also said that the Pact appealed to the West because it promised to secure and protect previous conquests thus securing their place at the head of the international legal order indefinitely 24 They wrote in 2017 As its effects reverberated across the globe it reshaped the world map catalyzed the human rights revolution enabled the use of economic sanctions as a tool of law enforcement and ignited the explosion in the number of international organizations that regulate so many aspects of our daily lives 25 26 Hathaway and Shapiro show that between 1816 and 1928 there was on average one military conquest every ten months After 1945 in very sharp contrast the number of such conflicts declined to one in every four years 27 The pact in addition to binding the particular nations that signed it has also served as one of the legal bases establishing the international norms that the threat 28 or use of military force in contravention of international law as well as the territorial acquisitions resulting from it 29 are unlawful The interdiction of aggressive war was confirmed and broadened by the United Nations Charter which provides in article 2 paragraph 4 that All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations One legal consequence is that it is unlawful to annex territory by force although other forms of annexation have not been prevented More broadly there is now a strong presumption against the legality of using or threatening military force against another country Nations that have resorted to the use of force since the Charter came into effect have typically invoked self defense or the right of collective defense 30 Notably the pact also served as the legal basis for the concept of a crime against peace It was for committing this crime that the Nuremberg Tribunal and Tokyo Tribunal tried and executed the top leaders responsible for starting World War II 7 Political scientists Julie Bunck and Michael Fowler in 2018 argued that the Pact was an important early venture in multilateralism I nternational law evolved to circumscribe the use of armed force with legal restrictions The forcible acquisition of territory by conquest became illegitimate and individual criminal liability might attach to those who pursued it In criminalizing war Kellogg Briand played a role in the development of a new norm of behavior in international relations a norm that continues to play a role in our current international order 31 See also editGeneva Protocol 1924 Anti Comintern Pact Four Power Pact Pact of Steel Tripartite Pact Washington Naval TreatyReferences editNotes See certified true copy of the text of the treaty in League of Nations Treaty Series vol 94 p 57 No 2137 a b c Kellogg Briand Pact 1928 Yale University a b Westminster Department of the Official Report Hansard House of Commons House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 16 Dec 2013 pt 0004 publications parliament uk a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint multiple names authors list link Marsh Norman S 1963 Book Reviews International and Comparative Law Quarterly 12 3 1049 1050 doi 10 1093 iclqaj 12 3 1049 ISSN 0020 5893 Bunck Julie M and Michael R Fowler The Kellogg Briand Pact A Reappraisal Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law vol 27 no 2 Spring 2019 pp 229 276 HeinOnline There s Still No Reason to Think the Kellogg Briand Pact Accomplished Anything Foreign Policy 29 September 2017 Retrieved 29 December 2017 a b Kelly Dawn Askin 1997 War Crimes Against Women Prosecution in International War Crimes Tribunals Martinus Nijhoff Publishers p 46 ISBN 978 9041104861 Binoy Kampmark Punishing wars of aggression conceptualising Nazi State criminality and the US policy behind shaping the crime against peace 1943 1945 War amp Society 2018 37 1 pp 38 56 a b c d Josephson Harold 1979 Outlawing War Internationalism and the Pact of Paris Diplomatic History 3 4 377 390 doi 10 1111 j 1467 7709 1979 tb00323 x Oona A Hathaway and Scott J Shapiro The Internationalists How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World 2017 p xxi 114 Charles DeBenedetti Borah and the Kellogg Briand Pact Pacific Northwest Quarterly 63 1 1972 22 29 Robert H Ferrell Peace in Their Time The Origins of the Kellogg Briand Pact Yale University Press 1952 pp 140 143 UNTC treaties un org US Department of State PDF state gov John James Blaine Archived 11 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine Dictionary of Wisconsin History Accessed 11 November 2008 The Avalon Project The Kellogg Briand Pact Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Relations United States avalon law yale edu Text in League of Nations Treaty Series vol 93 pp 344 363 Deletant Dennis 2006 Hitler s Forgotten Ally Ion Antonsecu and his Regime Romania 1940 1944 Springer ISBN 0230502091 Retrieved 7 August 2019 von Rauch Georg 1962 A History of Soviet Russia Praeger p 208 Retrieved 8 August 2019 King Charles 2013 The Moldovans Romania Russia and the Politics of Culture Hoover Institution Press p 39 ISBN 978 0817997939 Retrieved 8 August 2019 Milestones 1921 1936 Office of the Historian history state gov Quigley Carroll 1966 Tragedy And Hope New York Macmillan pp 294 295 Kershaw Ian 2016 To Hell and Back Europe 1914 1949 New York Penguin Books p 181 ISBN 978 0 14 310992 1 Menand Louis 18 September 2017 Drop Your Weapons The New Yorker Conde Nast Hathaway Oona A Shapiro Scott J 2017 The Internationalists How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World Simon and Schuster p xv ISBN 978 1 5011 0986 7 For detailed discussion by several scholars see H Diplo ROUNDTABLE XXI 15 https issforum org roundtables PDF Roundtable XXI 15 pdf Hathaway and Shapiro The Internationalists pp 311 335 Article 2 Budapest Articles of Interpretation Archived 25 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine see under footnotes 1934 Article 5 Budapest Articles of Interpretation Archived 25 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine see under footnotes 1934 Silke Marie Christiansen 2016 Climate Conflicts A Case of International Environmental and Humanitarian Law Springer p 153 ISBN 978 3319279459 Julie M Bunck and Michael R Fowler The Kellogg Briand Pact A Reappraisal Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 27 2 2018 229 276 online Bibliography Bunck Julie M and Michael R Fowler The Kellogg Briand Pact A Reappraisal Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 27 2 2018 229 276 online a major scholarly survey Carroll Francis M War and Peace and International Law The Kellogg Briand Peace Pact Reconsidered Canadian Journal of History 2018 53 1 86 96 Cavendish Richard The Kellogg Briand Pact Aims to Bring an End to War History Today 58 8 2008 11 DeBenedetti Charles Borah and the Kellogg Briand Pact The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 63 1 1972 22 29 Ellis Lewis Ethan Frank B Kellogg and American foreign relations 1925 1929 1961 online Ellis Lewis Ethan Republican Foreign Policy 1921 1933 1968 online Ferrell Robert H 1952 Peace in Their Time The Origins of the Kellogg Briand Pact Yale University Press ISBN 978 0393004915 H Diplo Roundtable XXI 15 on The Internationalists online Hathaway Oona A and Shapiro Scott J International law and its transformation through the outlawry of war International Affairs 2019 95 1 pp 45 62 Hathaway Oona A and Scott J Shapiro International law and its transformation through the outlawry of war International Affairs 2019 95 1 pp 45 62 Argues for a major impact that this prohibition is key to understanding international law and state behavior in the last century Johnson Gaynor Austen Chamberlain and the Negotiation of the Kellogg Briand Pact 1928 in Gaynor Johnson ed Locarno Revisited European Diplomacy 1920 1929 Routledge 2004 pp 54 67 Jones E Stanley The Pact Of Paris Officially The General Pact For The Renunciation Of War 1929 online Josephson Harold Outlawing war Internationalism and the Pact of Paris Diplomatic History 3 4 1979 377 390 Kampmark Binoy Punishing wars of aggression conceptualising Nazi State criminality and the US policy behind shaping the crime against peace 1943 1945 War amp Society 2018 37 1 pp 38 56 Limberg Michael In Relation to the Pact Radical Pacifists and the Kellogg Briand Pact 1928 1939 Peace amp Change 39 3 2014 395 420 Miller David Hunter The Pact of Paris A Study of the Briand Kellogg Treaty 1928 Shotwell James T War as an instrument of national policy and its renunciation in the pact of Paris 1929 online Swanson David When the World Outlawed War 2011 External links edit nbsp Wikimedia Commons has media related to Kellogg Briand Pact 1928 nbsp Works related to Kellogg Briand Treaty at Wikisource Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Kellogg Briand Pact amp oldid 1208914064, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.