Michael Skerker – författare

The idea of sovereignty and the debates that surroundit are not merely of historical, academic, or legal interest: they are also potent, vibrant issues and as current and relevant as today's front page news in the United States and in other Western democracies. In thepost- 9/11United States, the growth of the national security state has resulted in a growingstruggle to maintain the legal and ethical boundaries surrounding executive authority, boundaries that help to define and protect democratic governance. Thesepost-9/11 developments and their effect on the scope of presidential power present hard questions and arefueling today'sintensedebates among political leaders, citizens,constitutional scholars,historians, and philosophers. This volume will contribute to the public conversation on the nature of executive authority and its relation to the broader topic of sovereignty in several ways. First, readers will learn that the current vital questions surrounding the nature of executive authority and presidential power have their intellectual roots in historical and philosophical writings about the nature of sovereignty. Second, sovereignty has historically been a complicated topic; this volume helps identify the terms of the debate. Third, and most critically, citizens' understanding of the concept of sovereignty is essential to grasping the available options for confronting current challenges to the rule of law in democratic societies. The volume's 15 essays, drawn from among the disciplines of law, political, science, philosophy, and international relations,covers an expansive series of topics, from historical theories and international affairs, to governmental transparency and legitimacy. The volume also focuses on thechanges in the concept of sovereignty post-9/11 in the United States and their impact on democracy and the rule of law, particularly in the area of national security practice.

Turn on your television and you're bound to run across the concept of interrogation, whether it's on CNN or CSI. But despite daily mentions of the practice in the media, you're unlikely to find informed commentary on its moral implications. Moving beyond the narrow focus on torture that has characterized most work on the subject, "An Ethics of Interrogation" is the first book to fully address this complex issue. In doing so Michael Skerker confronts a host of philosophical and legal issues, from the right to privacy and the privilege against compelled self-incrimination to prisoner rights and the legal consequences of different modes of arrest, interrogation, and detention. These topics raise serious questions about the morality of keeping secrets and the differences between state power at home and abroad. Thoughtful consideration of these subjects leads Skerker to specific policy recommendations for law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals. Whether secrets can be elicited from unwilling subjects in a morally upright manner may be the defining dilemma of our historical moment, making Skerker's profound investigation into this pressing issue essential reading.

The act of interrogation, and the debate over its use, pervades our culture, whether through fictionalized depictions in movies and television or discussions of real-life interrogations on the news. But despite daily mentions of the practice in the media, there is a lack of informed commentary on its moral implications. Moving beyond the narrow focus on torture that has characterized most work on the subject, "An Ethics of Interrogation" is the first book to fully address this complex issue. In this important new examination of a controversial subject, Michael Skerker confronts a host of philosophical and legal issues, from the right to privacy and the privilege against compelled self-incrimination to prisoner rights and the legal consequences of different modes of interrogation for both domestic criminal and foreign terror suspects. These topics raise serious questions about the morality of keeping secrets as well as the rights of suspected terrorists and insurgents. Thoughtful consideration of these subjects leads Skerker to specific policy recommendations for law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals.

This book develops a new contractualist foundation for just war theory, which defends the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants and associated egalitarian moral norms.Traditionally it has been viewed that combatants on both sides of a war have the same right to fight, irrespective of the justice of their cause, and both sides must observe the same restrictions on the use of force, especially prohibitions on targeting noncombatants. Revisionist philosophers have argued that combatants on the unjust side of a war have no right to fight, that pro-war civilians on the unjust side might be targetable, and that lawful combatants on the unjust side might in principle be liable to prosecution for their participation on the unjust side. This book seeks to undercut the revisionist project and defend the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants. It does so by showing how revisionist philosophers fail to build a strong foundation for their arguments and misunderstand that there is a moral difference between collective military violence and a collection of individually unjustified violent actions. Finally, the book develops a theory defending the traditional view of military ethics based on a universal duty of all people to support just institutions.This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics philosophy, and war studies.

This book develops a new contractualist foundation for just war theory, which defends the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants and associated egalitarian moral norms.Traditionally it has been viewed that combatants on both sides of a war have the same right to fight, irrespective of the justice of their cause, and both sides must observe the same restrictions on the use of force, especially prohibitions on targeting noncombatants. Revisionist philosophers have argued that combatants on the unjust side of a war have no right to fight, that pro-war civilians on the unjust side might be targetable, and that lawful combatants on the unjust side might in principle be liable to prosecution for their participation on the unjust side. This book seeks to undercut the revisionist project and defend the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants. It does so by showing how revisionist philosophers fail to build a strong foundation for their arguments and misunderstand that there is a moral difference between collective military violence and a collection of individually unjustified violent actions. Finally, the book develops a theory defending the traditional view of military ethics based on a universal duty of all people to support just institutions.This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics philosophy, and war studies.