Legal Aspects of the Security-Development Nexus: International Administrative Law as a Check on the Use of Development Assistance in the "War on Terror"
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When delivering international development assistance, states should not be able to place the goal of protecting their citizens from transnational terrorism above that of alleviating poverty in developing countries. And yet this is precisely what they do on a regular basis when they use their policy on international development assistance to achieve security goals, as Canada, the US, and the UK have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is bad development policy, it does not increase the safety of those in developed states, and it is objectionable on political and moral grounds. This Article argues that international administrative law can be used to challenge the legitimacy of using development policy to achieve security aims. While many modern advocates of the international administrative law paradigm restrict its application to the promotion of procedural norms, thus making it difficult to review the discretionary decisions of government policymakers, nineteenth-century advocates of international administrative law-for example, Loren von Stein and Karl Neumeyer-were bolder. I develop their arguments in this Article, demonstrating that in a globalized world, the impact of governments' decisions on the welfare of those in other states requires us to recognize a cosmopolitan legal order. This legal order recognizes that each individual on the globe has a right to self-actualization, which is a right to have a say in decisions that affect her. The norm of equality inherent in a cosmopolitan conception of international law can have a direct effect on domestic law, limiting the ability of policymakers to make government policies that disregard the negative effects on the poor in developing countries. The domestic courts in donor and recipient countries can be used to ensure that harmful government policies are more consistent with the equality of all and the protection of basic human nights.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it