The Empire of International Law
07 Oct 2019-American Journal of International Law (The American Society of International Law)-Vol. 113, Iss: 1, pp 183-199
TL;DR: Hathaway and Shapiro as mentioned in this paper examined three intellectual histories focused on fundamental transformations of international law in the early twentieth century and examined how the normal recourse to force in international relations was replaced by an international law that bans the use of force, except in self-defense.
Abstract: This review essay examines three intellectual histories focused on fundamental transformations of international law in the early twentieth century. Juan Pablo Scarfi's Hidden History of International Law in the Americas is most interested in debates about a Pan-American international law, meaning the idea that international law might work differently in different regions, which was debated but eventually gave way to the change that Arnulf Becker Lorca, a Lecturer in Public International Law at Georgetown Law, discusses. Becker Lorca's Mestizo International Law is most interested in how the conception that international law applied only to civilized nations transformed into the modern conception that presumes sovereign equality. The Internationalists, by Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro, respectively the Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law and the Charles F. Southmayd Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy at Yale Law School, and seeks to understand how the normal (and legal) recourse to force in international relations was replaced by an international law that bans the use of force, except in self-defense. Ideas regarding these issues started to evolve in the late 1800s, but the transformative debates occurred at roughly the same time because the Hague Peace Conferences and the League of Nations allowed contestations over old versus updated understandings of international law to flourish.
Citations
More filters
Book•
16 Jul 2020TL;DR: The authors provides a rigorous, critical account of the making of the Civil War Regime, and illustrates the complex interplay of material, ideational, social and strategic factors in shaping these rules with important lessons for the making and unmaking of international law in a rapidly shifting international political, economic, and security environment.
Abstract: Civil war has been a fact of political life throughout recorded history. However, unlike inter-state wars, international law has not traditionally regulated such conflicts. How then can we explain the post-1945 emergence and evolution of international treaty rules regulating the conduct of internal armed conflict: the 'Civil War Regime'? Negotiating Civil War combines insights derived from Realist, Rationalist, Liberal, and Constructivist approaches to International Relations to answer this question, revisiting the negotiation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1977 Additional Protocols, and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. This study provides a rigorous, critical account of the making of the Civil War Regime. Sophisticated and persuasive, it illustrates the complex interplay of material, ideational, social, and strategic factors in shaping these rules with important lessons for the making and unmaking of international law in a rapidly shifting international political, economic, and security environment.
14 citations
01 Jul 2020
13 citations
TL;DR: In fact, Australia cooperated extensively with the George W. Bush administration during the 'war on terror' as mentioned in this paper. But in doing so, Australia failed to condemn, and in some instances, condoned US torture and...
Abstract: Australia cooperated extensively with the George W. Bush administration during the ‘war on terror.’ However, in doing so, Australia failed to condemn, and in some instances, condoned US torture and...
9 citations
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors argue that factor analyzing similar data such as happiness or trust or daily satisfaction yields the superfactor, which carries the predominant eigenvalues, yielding ambiguous dimensions for interpretation.
Abstract: AbstractEntering the Third Millennium, hyperdemocratization and hyperglobalization are visible. Hyperdemocratization is driven by keener awareness of the self in society either in an alienated direction (anarchism) or a state-centrically affected direction (nationalism). Hyperglobalization is driven by the sharper consciousness of a globalizing planet in either neo-protectionist or neo-liberalizing directions. Societal types are a patterned practice in a society. The society's equilibrium is built on Maslow's argument and further theorized by Inglehart. Not only survival and social relations dimensions but also the public policy prevalence dimension carries an important dimension. My methodological innovation is to listen to Fog (Cross-Cultural Research, 55(1), 29–57. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397120956948, 2021), who argues that factor analyzing similar data such as happiness or trust or daily satisfaction yields the superfactor, which carries the predominant eigenvalues, yielding ambiguous dimensions for interpretation. Societal Type: Abc, Acb, Bac, Bca, Cab, Cba are of six societal types: The dimension capitalized and the dimension noncapitalized are polar opposites on the same dimension. Societal Type consists of three dimensions: (1) survival (materialist vs nonmaterialist), (2) social Relations (post-materialist vs nonpost materialist), and (3) public policy preponderance (public policy prepomdderence vs nonpublic policy prechallenge). Legislative Type: abc, aBC, aBc, abC, Abc, AbC, ABc, ABC are of eight legislative types: These words capitalized denote the left-hand side of the same dimension, whereas those words noncapitalized denote the right-hand side of the same dimension. Legislative Type consists of three dimensions: (1) speed (cautious vs agile), (2) angle (global commons vs individual interested) and (3) strategy (aspirational bonding vs mutual bonding).
References
More filters
TL;DR: The UN's sanctions against Libya became an issue of great controversy in the Security Council in the 1990s owing to competing interpretations of the central legal norms of international relations as discussed by the authors, and the norms of due process, the presumption of innocence, and respect for international organizations were defended by both sides, but for opposite ends.
Abstract: The UN's sanctions against Libya became an issue of great controversy in the Security Council in the 1990s owing to competing interpretations of the central legal norms of international relations. The norms of due process, the presumption of innocence, and respect for international organizations (IOs) were defended by both sides, but for opposite ends. I use the contestation over norms and law at the Council to argue three broader themes about international politics: first, that states' perceptions about the legitimacy of international institutions is important in influencing state behavior; second, that this legitimacy creates powerful symbols in international relations that are strategically useful to states in the pursuit of their interests; and third, that the distribution of material power among states does not necessarily parallel the distribution of symbolic power, and so it is not uncommon for apparently strong states to be defeated by apparently weak ones when they fight over symbolic stakes. The norms of liberal internationalism are intersubjective resources useful in the strategic competition among states. For helpful comments on earlier drafts, I wish to thank the editors and anonymous reviewers of this journal, as well as Jose Alvarez, Stephen Brooks, Michael Doyle, Daryl Press, Henry Shue, Benjamin Valentino, Jennifer Welsh, William Wohlforth, and seminar participants at Columbia Law School, Dartmouth College, Oxford University, and ISA Montreal 2004.
136 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, a new way to understand the enforcement of domestic and international law that we call "outcasting" is proposed, which does not rely on bureaucratic organizations such as police or militia that employ physical force to maintain order, instead, outcasting involves denying the disobedient the benefits of social cooperation and membership.
Abstract: This Article offers a new way to understand the enforcement of domestic and international law that we call “outcasting.” Unlike the distinctive method that modern states use to enforce their law, outcasting is nonviolent: it does not rely on bureaucratic organizations, such as police or militia, that employ physical force to maintain order. Instead, outcasting involves denying the disobedient the benefits of social cooperation and membership. Law enforcement through outcasting in domestic law can be found throughout history - from medieval Iceland and classic canon law to modern-day public law. And it is ubiquitous in modern international law, from the World Trade Organization to the Universal Postal Union to the Montreal Protocol. Across radically different subject areas, international legal institutions use others (usually states) to enforce their rules and typically deploy outcasting rather than physical force. Seeing outcasting as a form of law enforcement not only helps us recognize that the traditional critique of international law - that it is not enforced and is therefore both ineffective and not real law - is based on a limited and inaccurate understanding of law enforcement. It also allows us to understand more fully when and how international law matters.
61 citations
TL;DR: Social Network Analysis (SNA) has been widely used in the social sciences and comparative research as mentioned in this paper, where the authors present a basic summary of the theoretical and methodological assumptions of SNA followed by a succinct overview of its application to diverse fields of study.
Abstract: This essay describes the pertinence of Social Network Analysis (SNA) for the social sciences in general, and discusses its methodological and conceptual implications for comparative research in particular. The authors first present a basic summary of the theoretical and methodological assumptions of SNA, followed by a succinct overview of its application to diverse fields of study. They then exemplify in greater detail one of the possible uses of SNA in comparative research, namely in studies on the transnational diffusion of innovations. In so doing, they draw on a case taken from their own research work, i.e. the introduction and dissemination of the so‐called monitorial system of education in early nineteenth‐century Hispanic America. The authors conclude with an assessment of the impact, possibilities, and weaknesses of SNA in the current conjuncture of comparative social and historical research.
54 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, an alternative account of the evolution, formation, and function of customary international law (CIL) from a third world perspective is presented. But the authors do not consider the relationship between the rise, consolidation, and expansion of capitalism in Europe since the nineteenth century and the development of CIL, which is concealed by the supposed distinction between formal and material sources.
Abstract: The article offers an alternative account of the evolution, formation, and function of customary international law (CIL) from a third world perspective. It argues that there is an intimate link between the rise, consolidation, and expansion of capitalism in Europe since the nineteenth century and the development of CIL that is concealed by the supposed distinction between “formal” and “material” sources of CIL. In fact, both “traditional” and “modern” CIL sustain the short-term and systemic interests of global capitalism. It proposes a “postmodern” conception of CIL that would contribute to the global common good.
42 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this paper, a new way to understand the enforcement of domestic and international law that we call "outcasting" is proposed, which does not rely on bureaucratic organizations, such as police or militia, that employ physical force to maintain order.
Abstract: TT. TT This Article offers a new way to understand the enforcement of domestic and international law that we call “outcasting.” Unlike the distinctive method that modern states use to enforce their law, outcasting is nonviolent: it does not rely on bureaucratic organizations, such as police or militia, that employ physical force to maintain order. Instead, outcasting involves denying the disobedient the benefits of social cooperation and membership. Law enforcement through outcasting in domestic law can be found throughout history—from medieval Iceland and classic canon law to modern-day public law. And it is ubiquitous in modern international law, from the World Trade Organization to the Universal Postal Union to the Montreal Protocol. Across radically different subject areas, international legal institutions use others (usually states) to enforce their rules and typically deploy outcasting rather than physical force. Seeing outcasting as a form of law enforcement not only helps us recognize that the traditional critique of international law—that it is not enforced and is therefore both ineffective and not real law—is based on a limited and inaccurate understanding of law enforcement. It also allows us to understand more fully when and how international law matters.
35 citations