> On 15 Nov 2017, at 20:03, Mark Blackman <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 15 Nov 2017, at 17:10, Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Nov 15, 2017, at 1:34 PM, Mark Blackman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Would you say that the current administrations of China, the US and Russia >>> observe diplomatic norms in general? >> Yes, certainly. It’s the exceptions that draw attention. Which is exactly >> the purpose of the norm: to make exceptions notable. >>> Possibly some norms are better than none, but I am not so sure. >> This is interesting, because several people on the UKNOF list are expressing >> similar views, and in a year of working on it, we haven’t heard this from >> anyone else. Can you expand a little? You prefer the status-quo? You see >> a danger in normalizing non-aggression? What’s the danger or problem that >> you’re considering? > I am not convinced that some unenforceable document enumerating norms will > change behaviours, that’s all. If I’m wrong, great. I am happy to fill out > the survey, if that helps stop attacks. I think state-level legislation is > likely to be more effective at restraining state actors than a list of norms,
State level legislation has to exist first.. > but perhaps enumerating norms will help trigger state-level legislation. I believe that is the point that Bill is trying to make. Regards Denesh
