Ronen Steinke, The Politics of International Criminal Justice: German Perspectives from Nuremberg to The Hague
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) marks a great leap forward towards a global community of values. The dynamic unleashed in the run-up to the Court’s creation undoubtedly came as a surprise, even to the protagonists of this process, who experienced one of those rare moments when long cherished idealism suddenly coincides with realpolitik. The conditions for this unexpected marriage of realism and idealism were particularly favourable in states not standing in the first rank of global politics, such as Argentina, Canada or Germany. For these states, the creation of a court that is largely independent from Security Council control was a chance to increase their say in the affairs of that new institution. This was the moment when political power interests and the vision of an independent body enforcing core values of the international order converged. Germany’s role in this remarkable development is the focus of the book The Politics of International Criminal Justice by Ronen Steinke, well-known to readers of the Süddeutsche Zeitung for his informed coverage of war crimes trials and other issues. The book sets out to analyse German positions towards international criminal justice. In particular, it critically examines the motivations behind the support of German policymakers for the United Nations tribunals and, finally, for a strong ICC.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".