@techreport{KriegerLiese2019,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krieger, Heike and Liese, Andrea Margit},
  title     = {A Metamorphosis of International Law?},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {27},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42608},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-426088},
  pages     = {26},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {The paper aims to lay out a framework for evaluating value shifts in the international legal order for the purposes of a forthcoming book. In view of current contestations it asks whether we are observing yet another period of norm change (Wandel) or even a more fundamental transformation of international law - a metamorphosis (Verwandlung). For this purpose it suggests to look into the mechanisms of how norms change from the perspective of legal and political science and also to approximate a reference point where change turns into metamorphosis. It submits that such a point may be reached where specific legally protected values are indeed changing (change of legal values) or where the very idea of protecting certain values through law is renounced (delegalizing of values). The paper discusses the benefits of such an interdisciplinary exchange and tries to identify differences and commonalities among both disciplinary perspectives.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{Krieger2019,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krieger, Heike},
  title     = {Populist governments and international law},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {29},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42686},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-426863},
  pages     = {29},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {The worldwide populist wave has contributed to a perception that international law is currently in a state of crisis. This article examines in how far populist governments have challenged prevailing interpretations of international law. The article links structural features of populism with an analysis of populist governmental strategies and argumentative practices. It demonstrates that, in their rhetoric, populist governments promote an understanding of international law as a mere law of coordination. This is, however, not entirely reflected in their legal practices where an instrumental, cherry-picking approach prevails. The article concludes that policies of populist governments affect the current state of international law on two different levels: In the political sphere their practices alter the general environment in which legal rules are interpreted. In the legal sphere populist governments push for changes in the interpretation of established international legal rules. The article substantiates these propositions by focusing on the principle of nonintervention and foreign funding for NGOs.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{KriegerPueschmann2019,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krieger, Heike and P{\"u}schmann, Jonas},
  title     = {Securing of Resources as a Valid Reason for Using Force?},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {31},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-43573},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-435738},
  pages     = {24},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {A growing demand for natural resources embedded in current changes of the international order will put pressure on states to secure the future availability of these resources. Some political discourses suggest that states might respond by challenging the foundations of international law. Whereas the UN Charter was inter alia aimed at eliminating uses of force for economic reasons, one may observe an on-going trend of securitization of matters of resource supply resulting into the revival of self-preservation doctrines. The chapter will show that those claims lack a normative foundation in the current framework of the prohibition of the use of force. Moreover, international law has sufficient instruments to cope with disputes over access to resources by other means than the use of force. The international community, therefore, must oppose claims that may contribute to normative uncertainties and strengthen already existing instruments of pacific settlement of disputes.},
  language  = {en}
}