Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Paper Proposal


                                                                                                                                      
Linda Ostermann
Poli 480: International Organization
Professor: Mark Shirk
10/30/2013
          

Adolf Eichmann in Argentina; his removal by Israeli nationals and his trial

Did Israel violate Argentina’s territorial sovereignty by abducting Adolf Eichmann without the approval of Argentina’s government?

            Otto Adolf Eichmann was a SS leader in Nazi Germany and was responsible for mass deportations of Jews into ghettos and extermination camps. One of his major assignments was to manage the Auschwitz Concentration camp in Poland. After World War II, Eichmann fled to Argentina. He used a fraudulently laissez-passer to leave Europe and lived in Argentina under a false identity. On May 11, 1960 Adolf Eichmann was taken to Israel by Israeli nationals. In Israel, Eichmann was charged with “crimes against the Jewish people” and “crimes against humanity”. He was executed in June 1960. The removal of Eichmann by Israel led to many controversies around the world. Israel’s removal of Eichmann was performed without the knowledge or authority of Argentina. Argentina responded with submitting a complaint to the Security Council alleging that Israel has violated the Argentina’s territorial sovereignty rights. After some discussion, the Security Council adopted on June 28, 1960 a resolution condemning Israel’s action. As a result of this resolution Israel and Argentina agreed to settle their differences. On August 8, 1960, they published a joint statement to that effect. 

            Some scholars argue that the removal of Adolf Eichmann was justified under Israeli law. Eichmann left Europe and entered Argentina under a false identity. In addition, he was a world-wide sought criminal. Under Israeli law, the trial of Eichmann was a legal process. In august, 1950, the Knesset adopted the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) law. Section one of that law described that any person who has “done during the period of the Nazi regime, in an enemy country, an act constituting a crime against the Jewish people” or an “act constituting a crime against humanity” or “an act constituting a war crime” is liable to the death penalty. 

            In my paper I will examine to what extend the right of sovereignty of Argentina was violated by Israel. In addition, I will focus on finding counter arguments that state that Israel actions were justified, not only by Israeli law but also under international law. 

            Here are some of the resources I will use: 

            J. G. Merrills, “Morality and the International Legal Order,” The Modern Law Review 31:5 (1968), pp. 520-534.
            Hans W. Baade, “The Eichmann Trial: Some Legal Aspects,” Duke Law Journal 1961:3 (1961), pp. 400-420. 
            David Luban, “Hannah Arendt as a Theorist of International Criminal Law,” International Criminal Law Review 11:3 (2011), pp. 621-641. 
            Covey Oliver, “The Attorney-General of the Government of Israel v. Eichmann,” The American Journal of International Law 56:3 (1962), pp. 805-845.  
            G.I.A.D. Draper, “The Eichmann Trial: A Judicial Precedent,” International Affairs 38:4 (1962), pp. 485-493

4 comments:

  1. Laura Webb
    POLI 480

    Research Paper Proposal

    The current conflict in Syria has brought significant attention to the United Nations initiative known as The Responsibility to Protect (or R2P). This doctrine is based upon the principle that “sovereignty is not a right, but a responsibility (U.N. World Summit, 2005) .” To enact this duty, R2P suggests a 3 pillar strategy which addresses the following: ( U.N. World Summit, 2009)
    1. The State carries the primary responsibility for protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, and their incitement;
    2. The international community has a responsibility to encourage and assist States in fulfilling this responsibility;
    3. The international community has a responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take collective action to protect populations, in accordance with the UN Charter.

    Since its establishment in 2005, R2P has proven to be controversial, igniting criticism on whether it has been previously effectively employed; or as other critics have concerned, the very nature of R2P is an overstep that violates a state’s national security. My research paper will examine this critique, in conjunction with the range of criticisms made toward R2P. I also will also study its past usage with the international community. I am curious to know the precise way in which R2P has been put into practice, and is so, what was the general consensus on its ability to be effective? Were any suggestions made towards improving its future use? Any interesting conclusions? I am interested to see if any significant points regarding its past usage perhaps could perhaps be used to predict its future role within the International community. The sources listed below will serve as a stepping block into my research on The Responsibility to Protect.
    1.http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgresponsibility.shtml
    2. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/canada/130830/Obama-canadians-UN-responsibility-to-protect-Syria-strike
    3. http://www.un.org/en http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICRtoPGAdebate.pdf/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/63/677
    4. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/09/17/responsibility_to_protect
    5. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mnp/gr2p/2011/00000003/00000004/art00006

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Laura!
      Your paper proposal is very clear and you included a very specific example. It will be very useful if you were to read "Sharing Sovereignty" by Stephen Krasner. I think this article will help you support your main argument.

      Delete
  2. Linda, I really think you have a great topic for your paper. It is very specific and easy to understand and gives a unique look on sovereignty. I think testing the sovereignty of Argentina also makes one think about what sovereignty really is.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Linda, I second Christie's comment, I also think your topic is very crystal-clear. I would add Argentina's neighboring countries' governments' reactions toward's Israel's actions to infiltrate and violate Argentina's territorial sovereignty. Also, I would add if any of the south american countries agrees or disagrees and if they have taken any particular actions to protect their own sovereignty. In general, your topic is great and very interesting : )

    ReplyDelete