How the United States justified its war on terrorism: prime morality and the construction of a ‘just war’

Just war theory has a long established reputation in the social sciences for evaluating the morality of the military actions of states. However, this analysis has rested upon assumptions of territorial sovereignty and the equal rights of states. The actions of hegemonic powers violate these twin assumptions through their expression of extra‐territorial reach. To avoid charges of immoral behaviour hegemonic powers must use the just war rhetoric of territoriality to justify their extra‐territorial acts. A world‐systems theory conceptualisation of hegemony allows for an interpretation of hegemonic military actions as the defence of a universal prime modernity. Prime modernity refers to an ideal organization of society projected by the hegemonic power as a form of integrative power. For the hegemonic power, threat is perceived as a rejection of the prime modernity anywhere rather than the language of border violations that dominates the foundations of just war theory. Using the language embedded in government and non‐government documents justifying the War on Terrorism, the manner in which a hegemonic power constructed military extra‐territoriality in a system of sovereign states as just is examined. The development of a ‘prime morality’ allowed the hegemonic power to claim that it was operating at the scales of the individual and ‘humankind’ rather than inter‐state power politics. The analysis challenges the implicit geographic assumptions of just war theory and extends our understanding of the imperatives underlying the hegemonic power's construction of its military actions as morally right.     

Parliamentary Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation: Lessons from Comparative Experience

Recent years have seen an increase in the use of delegated legislation to implement major policy decisions in the UK. This has exacerbated the longstanding criticism that Westminster lacks sufficiently robust procedures for parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation. However, the UK is not the only country to use delegated legislation, or to face the challenge of ensuring it receives adequate parliamentary scrutiny. This article therefore places the UK system in wider context by comparing it to six other national parliaments. We highlight one comparative strength of the UK system, two weaknesses it shares with the other six cases, and one way in which the UK might learn lessons from elsewhere. Overall, our evidence suggests that no one country offers a clear template for more rigorous parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation. Successful reform of the UK's system is likely to require creative procedural innovation.     

Reforming Indian agriculture and the rise of farmer's protest in India: Tracing the discourse and the way ahead

The Indian government unveiled new farm legislation on September 27, 2020, with the goal of empowering the farming community. According to the government, new farm regulations will reduce the reliance of indigenous farmers on the mandi (market yard) system, which is now in place and is quite exploitative and full of middlemen and legal cartels. The regulations made contract farming lawful with the intention of luring private sector investment in bolstering agricultural supply chains and infrastructure to give farmers better pricing. But these rules are referred to as repressive and anti-farmer by the farming community. Farmers believe that eliminating the mandi system will eliminate the minimum support price (MSP) mechanism and that contract farming will ultimately be damaging, enticing major corporations and private investors to bind them to unfair contracts that will result in exploitation. Farmers' demonstrations have begun as a result in the former territory of the green revolution. In order to determine if the new farm regulations introduced by the central government are indeed beneficial to the rural community or not, the article followed the debate among many academics, policy makers, economists, researchers, stakeholders, and politicians (the government's spokesman). The article's main focus is on analysing the farmers' demand for the new farm rules to be repealed and the economic justification for their opposition. Additionally, it contends that new farm rules will encourage capitalistic farming and endanger the viability of farming communities, particularly small and marginal farms (S&M).     

Relationships of depression to child and adult abuse and bodily pain among women who have experienced intimate partner violence

This study investigates whether depression in women who experienced intimate partner violence is associated with having also experienced childhood sexual and physical abuse, psychological abuse by an intimate partner, recent involvement with the abusive partner, and bodily pain. Fifty-seven women who had left a violent relationship with an intimate partner completed measures assessing their demographic characteristics, experiences of abuse in childhood and in their relationship with their intimate partner, and depressive symptoms. Multiple regression analysis showed that women's depression was significantly greater among those who had experienced childhood physical and sexual abuse, more severe psychological abuse, and greater bodily pain (p<.001), adjusted R(2)=.32. These results suggest characteristics that can help to identify abused women who are most at risk for depression, and they suggest specific issues that may need to be addressed in this population.     

THE SAUDI ARABIAN BUDGETING SYSTEM: AN INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT

This article describes and evaluates the budgetary institutions in Saudi Arabia. The primary sources of information for this study are publications from the Saudi Ministry of Finance and a survey implemented to investigate the different aspects of budget formulation and execution. We find that the Saudi budget experiences difficulties associated with incremental annual line‐item budgeting systems. Although capital expenditures in the education and health sectors are guided by five‐year plans developed by the Ministry of Planning, the rest of the budget preparation procedure is mainly driven by requests from government agencies to increase spending (i.e. a bottom‐up approach), instead of being based on an early determination of the macroeconomic constraints and the acceptable level of deficit (i.e. a top‐down approach). The result is an exacerbation of tragedy of the commons problems associated with information asymmetry and conflict‐avoidance strategies. We discuss possible reasons for this finding and offer budgetary reform proposals. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.