Friction, not erosion: Assassination norms at the fault line between sovereignty and liberal values

Reference list

• Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58, 239–275. doi: 10.1017/S0020818304582024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axelrod, R. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80, 1095–1111. doi:10.1017/S0003055400185016 doi: 10.2307/1960858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beres, L. R. (1991). Israel and anticipatory self-defense. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 8(1), 89–100.
   Google Scholar
• Bob, C. (2016). Rival networks and the conflict over assassination/targeted killing. In A. Bloomfield & S. V. Scott (Eds.), Norm antipreneurs and the politics of resistance to global normative change (pp. 72–88). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Checkel, J. T. (1998). The constructivist turn in international relations theory. World Politics, 50, 324–348. doi:10.1353/wp.1998.0002 doi: 10.1017/S0043887100008133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daase, C. (2003). Das Ende vom Anfang des nuklearen Tabus. Zur Legitimitätskrise der Weltnuklearordnung. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 10(1), 7–41. doi: 10.5771/0946-7165-2003-1-7
   Google Scholar
• de Witte, L. (2002). The assassination of Lumumba. New York, NY: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, T. (2007). ‘The rules of the game are changing’: Fundamental human rights in crisis after 9/11. International Politics, 44, 269–286. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800188
   Google Scholar
• Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52, 887–917. doi: 10.1162/002081898550789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick, J. (2003). Speaking law to power: The war against terrorism and human rights. European Journal of International Law, 14, 241–264. doi: 10.1093/ejil/14.2.241
   Google Scholar
• Ford, F. L. (1985). Political murder. From tyrannicide to terrorism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gentili, A. (1877). De jure belli libri tres. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gentili, A. (1924). De Legationibus Libri Tres. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, T. (2017). Targeted killings: Drones, noncombatant immunity, and the politics of killing. Contemporary Security Policy, 38, 212–236. doi:10.1080/13523260.2017.1336296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas, M. C., & Fischer, S.-C. (2017). The evolution of targeted practices: Autonomous weapons, future conflict, and the international order. Contemporary Security Policy, 38, 281–306. doi:10.1080/13523260.2017.1336407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller, R., Kahl, M., & Pisoiu, D. (2012). The ‘dark’ side of normative argumentation – The case of counterterrorism policy. Global Constitutionalism, 1, 278–312. doi: 10.1017/S2045381711000049
   Google Scholar
• Holsti, K. (2004). Taming the sovereigns: Institutional change in international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hurd, I. (2017). Targeted killing in international relations theory: Recursive politics of technology, law, and practice. Contemporary Security Policy, 38, 307–319. doi:10.1080/13523260.2017.1336605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, L. K. (2004). Congressional supervision of America’s secret agencies: The experience and legacy of the church committee. Public Administration Review, 64, 3–14. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00342 doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00342.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jose, B. (2017). Not completely the new normal: How Human Rights Watch tried to suppress the targeted killing norm. Contemporary Security Policy, 38, 237–259. doi:10.1080/13523260.2017.1334856
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasher, A., & Yadlin, A. (2005). Assassination and preventive killing. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 25(1), 41–57. doi: 10.1353/sais.2005.0011
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, M. (2004). Nation and assassination in the Middle East. Middle East Quarterly, 11(3), 59–63.
   Google Scholar
• Krasner, S. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kratochwil, F., & Ruggie, J. G. (1986). International organization: A state of the art on an art of the state. International Organization, 40, 753–775. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300027363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishnan, A. (2012). Gezielte Tötung. Die Individualisierung des Krieges. Berlin: Matthes & Seitz.
   Google Scholar
• Kutz, C. (2014). How norms die: Torture and assassination in American security policy. Ethics & International Affairs, 28, 425–449. doi: 10.1017/S0892679414000598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landolt, L. K. (2004). (Mis)constructing the third world? Constructivist analysis of norm diffusion. Third World Quarterly, 25, 579–591. doi: 10.1080/0143659042000191447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liese, A. (2009). Exceptional necessity. How liberal democracies contest the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment when countering terrorism. Journal of International Law and International Relations, 5(1), 17–47.
   Google Scholar
• McFaul, M. (2004). Democracy promotion as a world value. The Washington Quarterly, 28(1), 147–163. doi: 10.1162/0163660042518189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKeown, R. (2009). Norm regress: US revisionism and the slow death of the torture norm. International Relations, 23, 5–25. doi: 10.1177/0047117808100607
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melzer, N. (2008). Targeted killing in international Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, R. (2008). Introduction: U.S. National security, intelligence and democracy: From the church committee to the war on terror. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morgenthau, H. (1948). Politics among nations. New York, NY: Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Panke, D., & Petersohn, U. (2012). Why international norms disappear sometimes. European Journal of International Relations, 18, 719–742. doi: 10.1177/1354066111407690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Percy, S. V. (2007). Mercenaries: Strong norm, weak law. International Organization, 61, 367–397. doi: 10.1017/S0020818307070130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratzner, P. R. (2016). The current targeting process. In P. A. L. Ducheine, M. N. Schmitt, & F. P. B. Osinga (Eds.), Targeting: The challenges of modern warfare (pp. 77–97). The Hague: Asser.
   Google Scholar
• Price, R. (1995). A genealogy of the chemical weapons taboo. International Organization, 49, 73–103. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300001582
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, R. (2006). Detecting ideas and their effects. In R. E. Goodin & C. Tilly (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contextual political analysis (pp. 252–265). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rabe, S. G. (2012). The killing zone: The United States wages Cold War in Latin America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., & Ropp, S. C. (2013). Introduction and overview. In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 3–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (1999). The power of human rights. International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (2013). The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The socialization of human rights norms into domestic practices: Introduction. In T. Risse, S. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The power of human rights. International norms and domestic change (pp. 1–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosert, E., & Schirmbeck, S. (2007). Zur Erosion internationaler Normen: Folterverbot und nukleares Tabu in der Diskussion. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 14(2), 253–287. doi: 10.5771/0946-7165-2007-2-253
   Google Scholar
• Sandholtz, W., & Stiles, K. (2008). International norms and cycles of change. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, M. N. (2012). State-sponsored assassination in international Law. In M. N. Schmitt (Ed.), Essays on law and war on the fault lines (pp. 283–360). The Hague: Asser Press.
   Google Scholar
• Senn, M., & Troy, J. (2017). The transformation of targeted killing and international order. Contemporary Security Policy, 38, 175–211. doi:10.1080/13523260.2017.1336604
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikkink, K. (2013). The United States and torture: Does the spiral model work? In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 145–163). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spaight, J. M. (1911). War rights on land. London: MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, W. (2001). The ethics of destruction: Norms and force in international relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, W. (2005). The new age of assassination. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 25(1), 27–39. doi: 10.1353/sais.2005.0021
   Google Scholar
• Towns, A. E. (2012). Norms and social hierarchies: Understanding international policy diffusion “from below”. International Organization, 66, 179–209. doi: 10.1017/S0020818312000045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Security Council. (1988). Provisional verbatim record of the 2810th meeting, held at Headquarters, New York, on Monday, April 25 (UN Doc. No. S/PV.2810).
   Google Scholar
• Vlasic, M. V. (2000). Cloak and dagger diplomacy: The U.S. and assassination. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 1(2), 95–104.
   Google Scholar
• Vlasic, M. V. (2012). Assassination & targeted killing—A historical and post-Bin Laden legal analysis. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 43(2), 259–333.
   Google Scholar
• Wiener, A. (2009). Enacting meaning-in-use: Qualitative research on norms and international relations. Review of International Studies, 35, 175–193. doi: 10.1017/S0260210509008377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener, A. (2014). A theory of contestation. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Woodward, B. (2001, October 21). CIA told to do ‘whatever necessary’ to kill Bin Laden. Washington Post.
   Google Scholar