Judging War, Judging History: Behind truth and reconciliation * Localizing Transitional Justice: Interventions and priorities after mass violence
两本斯坦福大学出版社的著作批判了国际机构推行的转型正义机制，指出其缺乏验证且对受影响社区作用甚微，并分析了转型正义的政治起源与演变。
What many have assumed to be universal ways of dealing with a violent political past must be thoroughly assessed and revised. The legitimacy and efficiency of what international institutions and NGOs have defined, promoted, and implemented as valid and acceptable mechanisms to deliver justice and bring peace and reconciliation have proved to be largely untested, and their relevance to affected communities has been minimal at best. On the basis of this sharp and uncompromising assessment, two books published by Stanford University Press provide a remarkable set of analyses and concrete situations that should help to transform the current transitional justice paradigm in profound ways. In Judging War, Judging History, Pierre Hazan offers an erudite account of the genesis of transitional justice. He tells a compelling tale of how it emerged and rapidly developed over the last two decades. Hazan identifies three periods, the last of which begins on 11 September 2001 and is marked ‘by the eclipse of transitional justice as a utopia for rebuilding societies but also, paradoxically, by the institutionalization and by the professionalization of its institutions and practices’ (pp. 29–30). In identifying these periods, Hazan vigorously relocates transitional justice in the political sphere. He explains how its rise in power depended ‘on the political weight of the American superpower and the attractiveness of the cultural model of the “benevolent hegemon”’ (p. 44). As a result, the ‘toolbox’ of transitional justice reflected ‘the conviction that all problems, including the “management” of war crimes, had managerial solutions’ (p. 47). Human rights NGOs, identified as ‘the self-appointed moral sentinels of the new international order’ (p. 48), carried the vision that ‘politics, by nature, is corrupt and morally dangerous’ (p. 54). Transitional justice ‘offers the glimpse of a world that will from now on be peaceful through the domestication of violence by law, by the establishment of a just peace where the wounds of history can, at last, be healed’ (pp. 54–5). This hope, Hazan writes, died after 9/11, even if its legal instruments lingered.