In Unbound in War?, Sean Richmond examines the influence and interpretation of international law in the use of force by two important but understudied countries, Canada and Britain, during two of the most significant conflicts since 1945, namely the Korean War and the Afghanistan Conflict. Through innovative application of sociological theories in International Relations (IR) and International Law (IL), and rigorous qualitative analysis of declassified documents and original interviews, the book advances a two-pronged argument.

First, contrary to what some dominant IR perspectives might predict, international law can play four underappreciated roles when states use force. It helps constitute identity, regulate behaviour, legitimate certain actions, and structure the development of new rules. However, contrary to what many IL approaches might predict, it is unclear whether these effects are ultimately attributable to an obligatory quality in law. This ground-breaking argument promises to advance interdisciplinary debates and policy discussions in both IR and IL.

This book tells the story of how two of America’s closest allies, Canada and Britain, have sought to reconcile their security concerns with their legal obligations during two of the most significant international conflicts since the Second World War.

Acknowledgments

1. Introduction
Introduction
Organization of the book

2. Existing Literature, Research Design and Case Selection
International law and the use of force
Research design, method, and premises
Case selection
  a) Why focus on Britain and Canada?
  b) Why focus on the Korean War and Afghanistan Conflict?

3. Theoretical Framework
Introduction
How should we conceive of international law – as rules or process?
International law in the study of international relations
  a) Realist approaches
  b) Neo-liberal institutionalism
  c) Constructivist perspectives
The “interactional” approach
Positing the four roles of international law in the use of force by states

4. Britain and the Korean War
Introduction
Brief background to the Korean War
Why Britain participated in the Korean War
The four roles of international law in Britain’s use of force in Korea
  a) Constitutive
  b) Regulative
  c) Permissive and legitimating
  d) Structuring the development of new rules
The understanding of international law in Britain’s use of force in Korea
  a) Britain’s interpretation of the Security Council resolutions on the Korean crisis
  b) Britain’s interpretation of Article 118 of the Geneva Convention on POWs
Key findings

5. Canada and the Korean War
Introduction
Why Canada participated in the Korean War
The four roles of international law in Canada’s use of force in Korea
  a) Constitutive
  b) Regulative
  c) Permissive and legitimating
  d) Structuring the development of new rules
The understanding of international law in Canada’s use of force in Korea
  a) Canada’s interpretation of the Security Council resolutions on the Korean crisis
  b) Canada’s interpretation of Article 118 of the Geneva Convention on POWs
Key findings

6. Britain and the Afghanistan Conflict
Introduction
Brief background to the Afghanistan Conflict
The three phases of Britain’s military participation in the Afghanistan Conflict
Why Britain participated in the Afghanistan Conflict
The four roles of international law in Britain’s use of force in Afghanistan
  a) Constitutive
  b) Regulative
  c) Permissive and legitimating
  d) Structuring the development of new rules
The understanding of international law in Britain’s use of force in Afghanistan
a) Britain’s understanding of the UN Charter and NATO treaty
b) Britain’s interpretation of international human rights law
Key findings

7. Canada and the Afghanistan Conflict
Introduction
The three phases of Canada’s military participation in the Afghanistan Conflict
Why Canada participated in the Afghanistan Conflict
The four roles of international law in Canada’s use of force in Afghanistan
  a) Constitutive
  b) Regulative
  c) Permissive and legitimating
  d) Structuring the development of new rules
The understanding of international law in Canada’s use of force in Afghanistan
  a) Canada’s understanding of the NATO treaty and UN Charter
  b) Canada’s interpretation of the Geneva Convention on POWs
Key findings
 
8. Conclusion
Summary of findings
Significance of findings for theory and future research

Bibliography
Index

"In a stunning rebuke to realist international relations scholars, Sean Richmond proves that international law constrains national leaders as they decide when and how to go to war."

"Richmond’s refreshingly empirical, interdisciplinary work offers new and important insights into the ways international law influences state participation in armed conflict. In doing so, it not only contributes to our historical understanding of two profoundly consequential conflicts, but also illuminates perennial debates in international relations and international legal theory, teaching us valuable lessons about the potential – indeed the very nature – of international law."

"Focusing on concrete governmental decisions concerning the United Kingdom and Canada’s participation in the Korean War and Afghanistan Conflict, Sean Richmond shows how a sense of obligation mattered. Decisions were not ‘unbound’ but shaped in many ways by international law. This study is a major contribution to the dialogue between international law and international relations. It takes competing theoretical positions and tests them empirically. We need more studies like this one."