This book offers original essays on the subject of evil in international relations. It considers questions of moral agency associated with the perpetration of evil acts by individuals and groups in the international sphere, and the range of ethical responses the international community has available to it in the aftermath of large-scale evils.

This book seeks to reimagine why and how to confront mass atrocities in world politics. Drawing on Hannah Arendt’s conception of evil, it interprets and understands mass atrocities as ‘evil’ in an ‘Arendtian’ sense, that is, as crimes against human plurality and, thus, crimes against humanity itself. This understanding of mass atrocities paves the way for reframing responses to mass atrocities as attempts to confront evil. In doing so, the book focuses on military intervention under the banner of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and judicial intervention by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and reframes them as tools to protect human plurality from evil. Furthermore, the book looks at the place and the role of R2P and the ICC in the changing landscape of world order. It argues that the protection of humanity from evil can serve as a legitimate Grundnorm (basic norm) around which a global constitutional order in an inherently pluralistic world can be constructed.

This book seeks to determine what is meant by 'evil' when used to describe actors and events in international politics. Focusing on the history of evil in western secular and religious thought, it reintroduces a classical understanding of evil as the means to which we seek to understand otherwise meaningless human suffering.

This book seeks to determine what is meant by 'evil' when used to describe actors and events in international politics. Focusing on the history of evil in western secular and religious thought, it reintroduces a classical understanding of evil as the means to which we seek to understand otherwise meaningless human suffering.

This groundbreaking book from one of the foremost leaders in the field presents a fascinating continuum of research-informed strategies to prevent genocide from ever taking place; to avert further atrocities once mass murder occurs; and to prevent further turmoil once a society learns how to rebuild itself.

The study of international ethics is marked by an overwhelming bias towards reasoned reflection at the expense of emotionally driven moral deliberation. For rationalist cosmopolitans in particular, reason alone provides the means by which we can arrive at the truly impartial moral judgments a cosmopolitan ethic demands. However, are the emotions as irrational, selfish and partial as most rationalist cosmopolitans would have us believe? By re-examining the central claims of the eighteenth-century moral sentiment theorists in light of cutting-edge discoveries in the fields of neuroscience and psychology, Renée Jeffery argues that the dominance of rationalism and marginalisation of emotions from theories of global ethics cannot be justified. In its place she develops a sentimentalist cosmopolitan ethic that does not simply provide a framework for identifying injustices and prescribing how we ought to respond to them, but which actually motivates action in response to international injustices such as global poverty.

While it is true that genocide prevention is not what tends to land on the front pages of national newspapers today, it is what prevents the worst headlines from ever being made. Despite the post-Holocaust consensus that "Never Again" would the world allow civilians to be victims of genocide, the reality is closer to "Again and Again." As many as 170 million civilians across the world were victims of genocide and mass atrocity in the 20th century. Now that we have entered the 21st century, little light has been brought to that darkness as civilians still find themselves under brutal attack in South Sudan, Burma, Syria, the Central African Republic, Burundi, Iraq, and a score of other countries in the world beset by state fragility and extremist identity politics. Drawing on over two decades of primary research and scholarship from a wide range of disciplinary perspectives, Confronting Evil: Engaging Our Responsibility to Prevent Genocide is grounded in the belief that preventing mass atrocity is an achievable goal, but only if we have the collective will to do so. This groundbreaking book from one of the foremost leaders in the field presents a fascinating continuum of research-informed strategies to prevent genocide from ever taking place; to prevent further atrocities once genocide is occurring; and to prevent future atrocities once a society has begun to rebuild after genocide. With remarkable insight, Dr. James Waller challenges each of us to accept our responsibilities as global citizens-in whichever role and place we find ourselves-and to think critically about one of the world's most pressing human rights issues in which there are no sidelines, only sides.

The Axis of Evil institutionalized a new rhetoric of morality in international affairs which, at least in appearance, mirrors the ideological aspirations of George W. Bush and his neo-Conservative policy advisors. In its fight against evil, the US has economically and politically broken the Soviet Union, waged war against Afghanistan, toppled the Taliban regime, confronted Al-Qaeda ad threatened Syria, Iran and Northern Korea. But what is this notion of evil which has become part of the language of international politics? What are its historical origins and its moral, political and legal foundations? Is the fight against evil merely a new form of imperialism? against its potency as a tool for policy makers. He concludes that the greatest danger in combating the acts and individuals, broadly defined as evil, lies in a failure to grasp their true and varied nature in favour of attempts to blow evil away with unprecedented might.

Since 9/11 politicians, preachers, conservatives and the media are all speaking about evil. In the past the dicourse about evil in our religious, philosophic and literary traditions has provoked thinking, questioning and inquiry. But today the appeal to evil is being used as a political tool to obscure compex issues, block serious thinking and stifle public discussion and debate. We are now confronting a clash of mentalities, not a clash of civilisations. One mentality is drawn to absolutes, moral certainties, and simplistic dichotomies of good and evil. The other seriously questions an appeal to absolutes in politics and criticizes the simplistic division of the world into the forces of evil and the forces of good. In The Abuse of Evil Bernstein challenges the claim that without an appeal to absolutes, we lack the grounds for acting decisively in fighting our enemies. The post 9/11 abuse of evil corrupts both democratic politics and religion. The stakes are high in this clash of mentalities in shaping how we think and act in the world today - and in the future.