In: Legal issues of economic integration: law journal of the Europa Instituut and the Amsterdam Center for International Law, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Band 10, Heft 1, S. 27-39
Tucked away in the fairyland Duchy of Luxembourg and blessed, until recently, with benign neglect by the powers that be and the mass media, the Court of Justice of the European Communities has fashioned a constitutional framework for a federal-type structure in Europe. From its inception a mere quarter of a century ago, the Court has construed the European Community Treaties in a constitutional mode rather than employing the traditional international law methodology. Proceeding from its fragile jurisdictional base, the Court has arrogated to itself the ultimate authority to draw the line between Community law and national law. Moreover, it has established and obtained acceptance of the broad principle of direct integration of Community law into the national legal orders of the member states and of the supremacy of Community law within its limited but expanding area of competence over any conflicting national law.
In theory, we may envisage five principal types of national arms policy,reflecting as many policy objectives:(1) Arming to obtain the greatest possible weapons preponderance on the assumption that armed conflict is imminent. This policy of amassing military forces without regard for its effect on the other side results in an unrestrained arms race.(2) Arming to deter. The idea of deterrence is familiar to lawyers since it figures so prominently in criminal law. According to Schelling, deterrence as a strategic concept "is concerned with influencing the choices that another party will make, and doing it by influencing his expectations of how we will behave." Deterrence "requires that there be both conflict and common interest between the parties involved; it is as inapplicable to a situation of pure and complete antagonism of interest as it is to the case of pure and complete common interest."(3) Arms control. This policy envisages measures that aim at reducing the danger of war and at slowing down the arms race. Such measures may or may not involve actual restrictions upon military activities or reduction of armaments.(4) Comprehensive, reciprocal disarmament ("general and complete disarmament"), usually seen as a scheme "embodied in a single grand treaty leading by stages from less to more drastic and radical measures." In the final stage, the capabilities of national forces are reduced to those required for internal security only and a centralized international machinery is charged with peacekeeping.(5) Unilateral disarmament, a concept that is self-explanatory.