{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03145917001338688, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.75, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The United States, the United Nations, and the Legitimation of the Use of Force

Abstract : Utilizing Martin Wight's analysis of three theoretical traditions concerning international relations-Realism, Rationalism, and Revolutionism-this thesis examines the hypothesis that the U.S. Executive seeks, as a precondition of domestic political debate, legitimacy from the United Nations to justify the use of force in the post-Cold War political environment. To place the analysis in a meaningful context, the first part of the thesis reviews the evolution of sovereignty and war in the Western tradition since the sixteenth century, specifically the dispersion of sovereignty from autocrats to peoples, with an attendant shift in just war aims. The next part examines the legitimacy of the use of force in post-Cold War conflicts within the framework of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. Finally, the thesis assesses changes in public and Congressional acceptance of various justifications for the use of force within the U.S. political process. The thesis concludes that the U.S. finds useful legitimacy in the U.N., but U.N. endorsement is not a political prerequisite to use force; furthermore, a U.N. mandate does not compel the U.S. to employ force if U.S. interests are not also thereby served. Massive U.S. military involvement in the former Yugoslavia is therefore improbable unless (or until) the U.S. perceives a more tangible threat to its own security interests.