Baylis,, Smith and

d Owens: T
The Globa
alization of World Pol itics 6e
Re
evision guiide
18: Interna
ational law
w
Chapter 1

Sta
ates have strong
s
ince
entives to ffree thems
selves from
m the inseccurities of
inte
ernational anarchy.

Sta
ates face common
c
co
oordination
n and colla
aboration problems, yyet coopera
ation
rem
mains difficcult under anarchy.
a

To facilitate cooperatio
c
n, states ccreate interrnational in
nstitutions, of which th
hree
n modern internationa
al society: constitutio
onal instituttions, fund
damental
levvels exist in
insstitutions, and
a issue-s
specific insstitutions or regimes.

e are concerned with

h fundamen
ntal instituttions, of wh
hich internaational law
w is one of
We
the
e most imp
portant.

Mo
odern international law is a histo
orical arteffact, a prod
duct of thee revolution
ns in
tho
ought and practice
p
that transforrmed the governance
e of Europeean states after the
Fre
ench Revo
olution (178
89).

Be
efore the Frrench Revo
olution, in the Age of
o Absolutis
sm, law waas understood
principally ass the comm
mand of a le
egitimate superior,
s
and internaational law was seen
nd of God, derived fro
om natural law. In the modern period, law
w has
as a comman
com
me to be seen
s
as something co
ontracted between
b
le
egal subjeccts or their
rep
presentativves, and internationa l law has been
b
seen as the exppression off the
mu
utual will off nations.

Be
ecause of itts historica
al roots, the
e modern institution of
o internati onal law has a
number of disstinctive ch
haracteristtics, inform
med largely by the val ues of poliitical
libe
eralism.

The most disstinctive characteristiccs of the modern

m
insttitution of i nternational law are
al form of le
egislation, its consen
nt-based fo
orm of legaal obligation
n, its
its multilatera

Oxford Universityy Press, 2014.

Baylis,, Smith and

d Owens: T
The Globa
alization of World Pol itics 6e
Re
evision guiide
lan
nguage and
d practice of justificattion, and itts discours
se of instituutional auto
onomy.

o long as in
nternationa
al law was d
designed to
t facilitate
e internatioonal order, it was
So
circcumscribed in key wa
ays: statess were the principal subjects
s
annd agents of
o
inte
ernational law; intern
national law
w was conc
cerned with the regu lation of inter-state
rela
ations; and
d the scope
e of interna
ational law
w was confiined to queestions of order.
o

overnance is pushing international law intoo new area

as, raising
The quest forr global go
estions about whethe
er internatiional law is
s transform
ming into a form of
que
sup
pranationa
al law.

me extent ccollectivitie
es, are grad
dually acquuiring rightts and
Individuals, and to som
ressponsibilitie
es under in
nternationa
al law, esta
ablishing th
heir status as both su
ubjects
and
d agents under
u
intern
national law
w.

No
on-governm
mental acto
ors are beccoming inc
creasingly important i n the deve
elopment
and
d codification of interrnational le
egal norms
s.

Inte
ernational law is incrreasingly a
affecting do
omestic leg
gal regimess and prac
ctices, and
the
e rules of th
he internattional legall system are no longe
er confinedd to issues
s of order.
As internation
nal human
nitarian law
w evolves, issues
i
of global
g
justicce are perm
meating
e internatio
onal legal order.
o
the

acing limitss on the leg

gitimate usse of force is one of the key chaallenges off the
Pla
inte
ernational community
y, and the laws of wa
ar have evo
olved to m
meet this ch
hallenge.

The laws of war

w have trraditionallyy been divided into th
hose goverrning when
n the use
of fforce is leg
gitimate, ju
us ad bellum
m, and how
w war may
y be conduucted, jus in
n bello.

Law
ws governing when war
w is lega
ally permitte
ed have ch
hanged draamatically over the
hisstory of the
e international system
m, the mostt notable difference
d
bbeing betw
ween the
nin
neteenth-ce
entury view
w that to w
wage war was
w a soverreign right and the po
ost-1945

Oxford Universityy Press, 2014.

Baylis,, Smith and

d Owens: T
The Globa
alization of World Pol itics 6e
Re
evision guiide
vie
ew that warr was only justified in
n self-defen
nce or as part
p of a UN
N-mandate
ed
inte
ernational peace enfforcement a
action.

ws governing how war may be conducted

d divide, brroadly, intoo three cattegories:
Law
tho
ose govern
ning weapo
onry, comb
batants, and non-com
mbatants.

Sin
nce 2001 both
b
jus ad
d bellum an
nd jus in be
ello have come unde r challenge
e as the
Bush adminisstration sought to con
nduct the war
w on terrror without the constrraints of
p
of
o internatio
onal law, a practice that
t
the Obbama administration
esttablished principles
hass sought to
o reverse.

ealists argu
ue that inte
ernational la
aw is only important when it seerves the in
nterests of
Re
pow
werful stattes.

Ne
eo-liberals explain how self-inte
erested states come to
t construcct dense ne
etworks off
inte
ernational legal regim
mes.

onstructivissts treat international law as part of the no

ormative sttructures th
hat
Co
con
ndition statte and non
n-state age
ency in inte
ernational relations.
r
LLike other social
s
norms, they emphasize
e
e the way i n which law
w constituttes actors identities, interests,
d strategie
es.
and

Ne
ew liberals emphasize
e the dome
estic origin
ns of state preferencees and, in turn,
t
inte
ernational law. In inte
ernational law, they stress
s
the need
n
to dissaggregate
e the state
to understand
d transnatiional legal integration
n and interraction, andd they prio
oritize
ernational humanitarrian law.
inte

Criitical legal studies co

oncentratess on the wa
ay in which
h the inherrent liberaliism of
inte
ernational law seriou
usly curtailss its radica
al potential..

Oxford Universityy Press, 2014.