Education
Glennon studied political science at the College of Saint Thomas (Bachelor, 1970). Glennon attended law school at the University of Minnesota (Juris Doctor, 1973).
(NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia was justified. NATO violated...)
NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia was justified. NATO violated the United Nations Charter - but nations have used armed force so often that the ban on non-defensive use of force has been cast into doubt. Dangerous cracks in the international legal order have surfaced - widened, ironically, by the UN Security Council itself, which has ridden roughshod over the Charter's ban on intervention. Yet nations remain hopelessly divided on what the rules should be. An unplanned geopolitical order has thus emerged - posing serious dilemmas for American policy-makers in a world where intervention will be judged more by wisdom than by law.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312239017/?tag=2022091-20
(Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the Bu...)
Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the Bush to the Obama administration? National Security and Double Government offers a disquieting answer. Michael J. Glennon challenges the myth that U.S. security policy is still forged by America's visible, "Madisonian institutions" - the President, Congress, and the courts. Their roles, he argues, have become largely illusory. Presidential control is now nominal, congressional oversight is dysfunctional, and judicial review is negligible. The book details the dramatic shift in power that has occurred from the Madisonian institutions to a concealed "Trumanite network" - the several hundred managers of the military, intelligence, diplomatic, and law enforcement agencies who are responsible for protecting the nation and who have come to operate largely immune from constitutional and electoral restraints. Reform efforts face daunting obstacles. Remedies within this new system of "double government" require the hollowed-out Madisonian institutions to exercise the very power that they lack. Meanwhile, reform initiatives from without confront the same pervasive political ignorance within the polity that has given rise to this duality. The book sounds a powerful warning about the need to resolve this dilemma-and the mortal threat posed to accountability, democracy, and personal freedom if double government persists. This paperback version features an Afterword that addresses the emerging danger posed by populist authoritarianism rejecting the notion that the security bureaucracy can or should be relied upon to block it.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0190663995/?tag=2022091-20
( Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the ...)
Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the Bush to the Obama administration? National Security and Double Government offers a disquieting answer. Michael J. Glennon challenges the myth that U.S. security policy is still forged by America's visible, "Madisonian institutions"--the President, Congress, and the courts. Their roles, he argues, have become largely illusory. Presidential control is now nominal, congressional oversight is dysfunctional, and judicial review is negligible. This book details the dramatic shift in power that has occurred from the Madisonian institutions to a concealed "Trumanite network"--the several hundred managers of the military, intelligence, diplomatic, and law enforcement agencies who are responsible for protecting the nation and who have come to operate largely immune from constitutional and electoral restraints. Reform efforts face daunting obstacles. Remedies within this new system of "double government" require the hollowed-out Madisonian institutions to exercise the very power that they lack. Meanwhile, reform initiatives from without confront the same pervasive political ignorance within the polity that has given rise to this duality. This book sounds a powerful warning about the need to resolve this dilemma--and the mortal threat posed to accountability, democracy, and personal freedom if double government persists.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0190206446/?tag=2022091-20
( When and why are international rules binding? Focusing ...)
When and why are international rules binding? Focusing on questions of state security, The Fog of Law considers the nature of obligation in international law. In so doing, it challenges the prevailing theories of obligation based on natural law or positive law approaches. Michael J. Glennon argues for a pragmatist approach to international law—that international law has force when enough countries honor it. Using elements of rational choice theory, Glennon describes an international "frame of mind" that draws on the fluctuating network of incentives and disincentives surrounding international rules to explain states' uneven compliance. The Fog of Law defends its approach through discussions of key contemporary security issues, including the United Nations' use of force rules, security assurances, nuclear proliferation, and the new crime of aggression proposed for the International Criminal Court.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0804771758/?tag=2022091-20
Glennon studied political science at the College of Saint Thomas (Bachelor, 1970). Glennon attended law school at the University of Minnesota (Juris Doctor, 1973).
He is the author of. As an undergraduate, he worked for three summers as a staff assistant for congressman Donald M. Fraser (Doctorate-Minnesota). After graduating law school, Glennon worked as assistant counsel for the Office of the Legislative Counsel at the United States Senate.
From 1977-1980, he was counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Glennon was professor of law at the University of California, Davis from 1987-2002, and a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars from 2001-2002.
Since 2002, he has been professor of international law at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
( When and why are international rules binding? Focusing ...)
(NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia was justified. NATO violated...)
(Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the Bu...)
( Why has U.S. security policy scarcely changed from the ...)