صلح پایدار و عدالت سیاسی جهانی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی تهران

چکیده

جنگ و صلح تاریخی بسیار طولانی به درازای زندگی بشریت دارد. فارغ از تلاش های علمی برای تبیین مفهومی جنگ عادلانه و قانون‌گذاری های بین المللی برای تعیین محدودیت و مشروعیت آن، پدیده جنگ همواره ناخوشایند بوده است. از این رو، دانشمندان حوزه های گوناگون علوم اجتماعی تلاش کرده اند تا با نظریه‌پردازی های دقیق راه های دستیابی به صلح فراگیر و عادلانه را فراروی دولت ها و ملت ها قرار دهند. بی‌تردید مهم ترین، یا دست کم بحث‌انگیزتزین این تلاش ها، آموزه صلح دموکراتیک بوده است که بر مفاهیم اخلاقی جهانشمول اتکا دارد. به واقع، آیا می توان برای آرمان صلح جهانی بنیان های اخلاقی مشترک جست و در دوران کنونی جهان‌شهرگرایی اخلاقی را محقق ساخت؟ گمان می رود در مدرنیته اخیر بنیان های اجتماعی جهان شهرگرایی فرو پاشیده و این مفهوم به یک دلبستگی تفننی تبدیل شده است. با این وجود، تلاش برای تبیین واقعیت های کنونی و چشم اندازهای آینده جوامع با بهره گیری از الگوی جهان‌شهرگرایی، به ویژه از جایگاهی اخلاقی همچنان اهمیت دارد. بحث از جهان شهرگرایی اخلاقی ما را به دو نظریه پرداز برجسته آن، یعنی ایمانوئل کانت و جان راولز رهنمون می کند. این دو اندیشمند به ترتیب بر «صلح پایدار» و «عدالت سیاسی جهانی» تاکید دارند. این مقاله در بررسی رابطه «صلح پایدار» کانت و «عدالت سیاسی جهانی» راولز، نشان می دهد که مفهوم اخیر در آرمان‌گرایی جمهوری‌خواهانه، از بنیان های اخلاقی صلح پایدار کانتی چون خودسامانی، قلمرو غایت ها و قراردادگرایی اجتماعی تاثیر پذیرفته است. اما واقع گرایی سیاسی راولز تلاش دارد تا بر ابهام کانت در چگونگی پر کردن فاصله بین عمل به امر مطلق و ساخت سیاسی فایق آید. بدین سان، او نظریه اخیر خود را بر دوری گزینی از دلالت های جهان شهرگرایانه فراتاریخی کانتی بازسازی می کند. این اندیشه آرمان-واقع گرا در پژوهش های کنونی صلح دموکراتیک تداوم یافته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Perpetual Peace and World Political Justice

نویسنده [English]

  • . .
چکیده [English]

Regardless of the scientific efforts for conceptual clarification of just war and International legislation for determining its restriction and legitimacy, the phenomenon of war is always unpleasant. Undoubtedly the most important, or at least most Controversial of these efforts, has been the doctrine of democratic peace, which relies on universal moral concepts. In fact, can we find common moral foundations for the ideal of world peace and realize moral cosmopolitan in our time? It is believed that cosmopolitan has been collapsed during the late modern and the concept has become a fancy attachment.However, trying to explain the current reality and future prospects of communities, benefiting from cosmopolitan pattern, especially in a moral position, is still important. Discussion of the moral cosmopolitanism lead us to two prominent theorist, Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. These two scholars, emphasize on "perpetual peace" and "world political justice" in turn. This article, examining the relationship between Kant's "perpetual peace" and Rawls' "global political justice", indicates that the recent concept has been influenced of the moral foundations of Kant's perpetual peace in republican idealism, like self-organizing, Kingdom of Ends and social contractualism. But Rawls' political realism attempts to overcome on Kant's ambiguity on how to bridge the gap between the action to categorical imperative and political structure. Thus, he reconstruct its recent theory at ​​the escaping of Kant's cosmopolitan and transhistorical implications. The idea of ​​the ideal-realistic continues in the current studies of democratic peace.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Perpetual Peace
  • World Political Justice
  • Moral Cosmopolitanism

الف- فارسی

بلوم، ویلیام تی. (1373)، نظریههاینظامسیاسی، دو جلد، ترجمه احمد تدین، تهران: نشر آران.

معظمی، علی (1388)، "صلح پایدار و عاملیت سیاسی نزد کانت"، فصلنامهتاملاتفلسفی، سال اول، شماره سوم.

ب- انگلیسی

Baker, C. Edwin (2008), “Rawls, equality, and democracy”, Philosophy & Social Criticism; vol. 34, 3: pp. 203-246.

Bayer, Reşat and Michael Bernhard (2010), "The Operationalization of Democracy and the Strength of the Democratic Peace: A Test of the Relative Utility of Scalar and Dichotomous Measures", Conflict Management and Peace Science; vol. 27, 1: pp. 85-101.

Budde, Kerstin (2007), “Rawls on Kant: Is Rawls a Kantian or Kant a Rawlsian?”, European Journal of Political Theory; vol. 6, 3: pp. 339-358.

Cederman, Lars-Erik (2001), “Modeling the Democratic Peace as a Kantian Selection Process”, Journal of Conflict Resolution; vol. 45, 4: pp. 470-502.

Choi, Seung-Whan (2013), “The Democratic Peace through an Interaction of Domestic Institutions and Norms: Executive Constraints and Rule of Law”, Armed Forces & Society; vol. 39, 2: pp. 255-283.

Choi, Seung-Whan and Patrick James (2008), “Civil—Military Structure, Political Communication, and the Democratic Peace”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 45, 1: pp. 37-53.

Cox, Dan G. and A. Cooper Drury, (2006), “Democratic Sanctions: Connecting the Democratic Peace and Economic Sanctions”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 43, 6: pp. 709-722.

Deudney, Daniel (2004), “Publius Before Kant: Federal-Republican Security and Democratic Peace”, European Journal of International Relations; vol. 10, 3: pp. 315-356.

Dieterich, Sandra, Hartwig Hummel and Stefan Marschall (2015), “Bringing democracy back in: The democratic peace, parliamentary war powers and European participation in the 2003 Iraq War”, Cooperation and Conflict; vol. 50, 1: pp. 87-106.

Doyle II, Thomas E (2015), “When liberal peoples turn into outlaw states: John Rawls’ Law of Peoples and liberal nuclearism”, Journal of International Political Theory; vol. 11, 2: pp. 257-273.

Eckert, Amy E. (2015), “States as social entities: Re-examining the assumption of mutual disinterest in Rawls’ Law of Peoples”, Journal of International Political Theory; vol. 11, 2: pp. 224-238.

Frazer, Michael L. (2007), “John Rawls: Between Two Enlightenments”, Political Theory; vol. 35, 6: pp. 756-780.

Goenner, Cullen F. (2007), “Economic War and Democratic Peace”, Conflict Management and Peace Science; vol. 24, 3: pp. 171-182.

Harrison, Ewan (2010), “The democratic peace research program and system-level analysis”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 47, 2: pp. 155-165.

Hayden, Patrick (2002), John Rawls: Towards a Just World Order, University of Wales Press.

Hayes, Jarrod (2011), “The democratic peace and the new evolution of an old idea”, European Journal of International Relations; vol. 18, 4: pp. 767-791.

Henderson, Errol A. (1999), “Neoidealism and the Democratic Peace”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 36, 2: pp. 203-231.

Hermann, Margaret G. and Charles W. Kegley, JR. (2001), “Democracies and Intervention: Is there a Danger Zone in the Democratic Peace?”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 38, 2: pp. 237-245.

Ish-Shalom, Piki (2006), “Theory as a Hermeneutical Mechanism: The Democratic-Peace Thesis and the Politics of Democratization”, European Journal of International Relations; vol. 12, 4: pp. 565-598.

Kant, Immanuel (1785), The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, 2nd ed., Trans. Lewis White Beck with Critical essays ed. Robert Paul Wolff, New York & London: Macmillan, 1990.

Kant, Immanuel (1917), Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Essay, translated with Introduction and Notes by M. Campbell Smith, with a Preface by L. Latta, London: George Allen and Unwin.

این اثر با مشخصات روبرو به فارسی ترجمه شده است: کانت، ایمانوئل (1380)، صلحپایدار، ترجمه‌ محمد صبوری، تهران: به باوران.

Kochi, Tarik (2007), “The Problem of War; Rawls and the Law of Peoples Law”, Culture and the Humanities; vol. 3, 2: pp. 244-265.

Koukouzelis, Kostas (2009), “Rawls and Kant on the public use of reason”, Philosophy & Social Criticism; vol. 35, 7: pp. 841-868.

Lees, Nicholas (2013), “Structural Inequality, Quasi-rents and the Democratic Peace: A Neo-Ricardian Analysis of International Order”, Millennium - Journal of International Studies; vol. 41, 3: pp. 491-515.

Lektzian, David and Mark Souva (2009), “A Comparative Theory Test of Democratic Peace Arguments, 1946—2000”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 46, 1: pp. 17-37.

Macmillan, John (2003), “Beyond the Separate Democratic Peace”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 40, 2: pp. 233-243.

Mousseau, Michael and Yuhang Shi (1999), “A Test for Reverse Causality in the Democratic Peace Relationship”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 36, 6: pp. 639-663.

Park, Johann (2013), “Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War”, Conflict Management and Peace Science; vol. 30, 2: pp. 178-194.

Patty, John W. and Roberto A. Weber (2006), “Agreeing to fight: an explanation of the democratic peace”, Politics, Philosophy & Economics; vol. 5, 3: pp. 305-320.

Pettit, Philip (2010), “A Republican Law of Peoples”, European Journal of Political Theory, 9: 70-94.

Quackenbush, Stephen L. and Michael Rudy (2009), “Evaluating the Monadic Democratic Peace”, Conflict Management and Peace Science; vol. 26, 3: pp. 268-285.

Rawls, John. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

Rawls, John (1980), “Kantian constructivism in moral theory”, Journal of Philosophy, 77 (9): 515-572.

Rawls, John (1993), Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press.

Rawls, John (1999), The law of peoples, with “The Idea of public Reason revisited, Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press.

Robinson, Eric (2001), “Reading and Misreading the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 38, 5: pp. 593-608.

Robinson, Gwen and Fergus McNeill (2008), “Exploring the dynamics of compliance with community penalties”, Theoretical Criminology; vol. 12, 4: pp. 431-449.

Wagner, Wolfgang (2003), “Building an Internal Security Community: The Democratic Peace and the Politics of Extradition in Western Europe”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 40, 6: pp. 695-712.

Weart, Spencer R. (2001), “Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace”, Journal of Peace Research; vol. 38, 5: pp. 609-613.

Williams, Michael C. (2001), “The Discipline of the Democratic Peace:: Kant, Liberalism and the Social Construction of Security Communities”, European Journal of International Relations; vol. 7, 4: pp. 525-553.

Wolf, Martin (2004), Why Globalization Works?, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Zinnes, Dina A. (2004), “Constructing Political Logic: The Democratic Peace Puzzle”, Journal of Conflict Resolution; vol. 48, 3: pp. 430-454.