This chapter describes the historical survey of superior responsibility. It examines who may be subjected to the doctrine, seeking to ascertain whether the concept of superior is a fixed one, or whether it fluctuates in accordance with certain identifiable parameters. The chapter also examines the existence of a meaningful difference between the terms 'command' and 'control'. Army officers do not argue that the doctrine is misconceived, they simply refuse to subject their military to it, as far as this is possible without showing forthright contempt for international humanitarian law. Incarceration of a culprit, after judicial ascertainment of the underlying crimes and motives, serves in the minds of the victims to restore truth and ultimately allow them to continue their lives. The chapter considers the procedural aspects of the doctrine under what circumstances natural persons are deemed to possess such authority over others as to incur criminal liability for their crimes.

Articles 14 to 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights relate to the scope and exercise of the rights guaranteed. Article 14 establishes the principle of non-discriminatory application, Article 15 allows for the exercise of emergency powers, and Article 17 is intended to prevent abuse of the Convention's freedoms. Article 16 is very short and provides: 'Nothing in Articles 10, 11 and 14 shall be regarded as preventing the High Contracting Parties from imposing restrictions on the political activity of aliens.' Article 18 provides: 'The restrictions permitted under this Convention to the said rights and freedoms shall not be applied for any purpose other than those for which they have been prescribed.' The inclusion of a separate reference to authorised limitations should be thought of as no more than a drafting technique used to indicate. Article 57 of the Convention deals with the important question of reservations.

Chapter 6 begins with the murder by police of George Floyd in May 2020, whose last words ‘I can’t breathe’ resonated across the world as people took to the streets to protest against police brutality and racism. This chapter argues that even though the police murder of a Black American citizen on the streets of Minneapolis may seem a far cry from the realm of nuclear politics, George Floyd’s death occurred due to the structural racism that permeates and shapes state institutions, global politics more broadly, and much thinking and policy about nuclear weapons. To illustrate this point the author examines the role of racism, colonialism, and orientalism in the Third Nuclear Age, as evidenced in renewed calls for the United States to test a nuclear weapon for the first time in decades on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the American atomic bombing of Japan. In tracing the linkages between the racism that underpinned the testing of nuclear weapons on indigenous lands and the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with the racism that led to renewed calls to test nuclear weapons today, the chapter argues that the Third Nuclear Age cannot be understood without an interrogation of colonialism and white supremacy in nuclear politics.

Article 7 is one of the provisions not subject to derogation under Article 15 which is an indication of its importance. However, although Article 7 deals with a fundamental aspect of the principle of legality, it is subject to certain limitations. The scope of Article 7 is limited to the criminal law where judicial legislation is now uncommon. A great many different issues have arisen in relation to Article 8 which can conveniently be considered under the four headings of privacy, family life, home and correspondence. Article 9(1) makes a distinction between the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion on the one hand, and the manifestation of religion or belief on the other. Freedom of religion includes, as Article 9(1) indicates, freedom to change one's religion, as well as the freedom to teach and practise it.

Chapter 5 revolves around the purpose of humanitarian aid defined by the desire to help and argues that it leaves a key motivation out of sight: how aid is animated by its twin desire to connect. This can include first-hand contact with those they support, such as bringing supplies to schools. It can mean direct experience of aid activities, and their tangible efficacy. Establishing personal relationships across national, ethnic and cultural differences, while potentially challenging, is a key motivation for those involved. These connections are often sought with people in need, separated by geographical distance, and who may be considered ‘Other’ in some ways from everyday humanitarians themselves. The ‘impulse of philanthropy’ (Bornstein 2009), is here conjoined with a parallel, anthropological impulse to know and connect with an Other. The importance of relationships for institutionalised aid has, at least partly, been recognised. More than social relations being instrumental to successful aid practice, the chapter suggests that providing assistance to others can facilitate the making of these desired relations. Rather than assisting distant strangers, forging these connections means making relationships personal. This can lead to long-term connections between people, regular visits and contact with overseas supporters. The desire to connect unsettles notions of the ‘distant stranger’ as the archetypical humanitarian object, highlighting the familiarity and closeness just as important for motivating assistance to others.

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 relates to property rights. Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 provides: 'No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.' Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 provides: 'The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.' Article 1 of Protocol No. 6 reads as follows: 'The death penalty shall be abolished. No one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed.'

The introduction establishes the context for the book, as well as the central argument: that the world is racing towards unparalleled catastrophe by entering a dangerous Third Nuclear Age that cannot be understood simply by focusing on the realm of the ‘high politics’ of state leaders, techno-strategic developments and military doctrine. Instead, the work of the peace activist and historian E. P. Thompson on the concept of exterminism is introduced in order to demonstrate how an attention to the broader cultural politics and lived experiences of the Third Nuclear Age can help us to understand and address the challenges that now confront us. This chapter highlights how the book builds upon and extends a burgeoning field of research on critical nuclear studies, before providing an outline of the book.

The 'Partnership for Peace' programme of the NATO alliance embraces such traditionally neutral countries as Sweden and Switzerland. Historical perspective, however, must lead to instant suspicions of any claims of the death of neutrality. The period from approximately the middle of the eighteenth century to the middle of the twentieth has witnessed, overall, an advance of the position of belligerents at the expense of that of neutrals. The world may be entering a period somewhat like the early and mid-nineteenth century, in which the absence of protracted great-power warfare led to a general belief that the balance of legal power was swinging in favour of neutrals and against belligerents. That hope on the part of champions of neutral rights proved misplaced at that time. And it could very easily prove misplaced again now.