The European Court of Human Rights: Implications for United States National Security
Abstract
The United States National Security Strategy (NSS) consistently emphasizes two concepts: the enduring importance of alliances and coalitions and the significance of U.S. support to international rule of law. In practical terms, however, these concepts can be deeply contradictory; while the NSS emphasizes partnerships and multi-lateral engagement, there is a widening gap between the U.S. and its traditional partners regarding international law. The United States, while consistently espousing support for the rule of law, has established a strong trend of abstaining from treaties and other instruments that it perceives will encroach on its sovereignty, including those related to national security that seem to be firmly in line with American values. While the U.S. must continue to guard its sovereignty, it must also acknowledge the link between its support of international rule of law and its legitimacy in the eyes of the world. The legacy strategy of avoiding international legal engagement, combined with evolving international legal norms, will complicate the U.S. s ability to address global security concerns multilaterally. The U.S. must incorporate this changing legal landscape in determining its future strategy regarding international law or risk a reduction of American legitimacy and influence, which can impair achievement of national security goals.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Feb 04, 2014
- Accession Number
- ADA613370
Entities
People
- Katherine Graef
Organizations
- Naval War College