POSC 2200 – International Law, International Organizations, and Non-Governmental Organizations

1. POSC 2200 – International Law, International Organizations, and Non-Governmental Organizations Russell Alan Williams Department of Political Science

2. Unit Four: International Law, International Organizations, & Non-Governmental Organizations October 8: “International Law” Required Reading: • Globalization of World Politics, Chapter 17. • Roth, The Case for Universal Jurisdiction Outline: • Introduction • Origins of International Law • The Expanding Reach of International Law • International Law and War • Conclusions

3. 1) Introduction: • “International Law”: The formal rules of conduct states acknowledge in international politics • Never more debate about international law then now . . . • E.g. Invasion of Iraq • E.g. Independence of Kosovo • Debates highlight problems of “International Law” 1) Sources and legitimacy? 2) Enforceability?

4. Traditional view has been highly skeptical about international law = influence of “realism” • Text: “. . . . international law is either a servant of the powerful or an irrelevant curiosity.” • However, contemporary view is that international law is a “core” institution in international politics • “Neoliberal Institutionalism”– all states wish to reduce uncertainty of anarchy and international law is a key mechanisms for helping states overcome incentives to not cooperate • “Constructivism” – International law generates key norms for state behavior

5. 2) Origins of International Law: Sources and legitimacy of International Law comes from: a) Custom b) Treaties c) Authoritative bodies d) Courts Result uneven - simply not as “legitimate” as domestic law • Lack of legislature = Contradictions? • Lack of enforcement = Precedents for illegality

6. a) Custom - Modern components of international law influenced by • European religion = “god’s laws” were superior to those of any state – Christian states were obliged to act in a way that was consistent with religious doctrine. • These idea began to disappear in 19th and 20th century as international law became more judicial and legalistic, but international law is still “western” . . . . • Customs of European statehood • Rights of Diplomats • “Law of the Sea” • Provisions emerged out practice but have become “codified”

7. b) Treaties – substitutes for legislation • E.g. Key texts that establish longstanding legal principles • E.g. Legally binding on states that have ratified them (meaning?) • Peace of Westphalia (1648) • Treaty of Versailles (1919) • Charter of the United Nations (1945) – Clearly specified both the rights and the obligations of member states

8. c) Authoritative bodies – E.g. codifying customary law or NGO-promoted “new law” • E.g. UN International Law Commission d) Courts – both international and domestic • E.g. “International Court of Justice” (ICJ) • E.g. “International Criminal Court” (ICC) – Most ambitious effort to create international law in which individuals are also subjects and agents • E.g. “Universal Jurisdiction”

9. Enforceability of International Law? • Often relies on moral suasion . . . . • Can be “enforced” through diplomacy • E.g. Negative Sanctions • E.g. Compellence • However, suggests international law can only be tool of powerful • What does this mean?

10. 3) The Expanding Reach of International Law: Recent decades have seen efforts to expand international law, placing human rights above sovereignty and making law enforceable(!) • Prosecute individuals who violate international law – more systematic 1) “International Criminal Court” (ICC) 2) “Universal Jurisdiction”: Legal concept empowering states to claim authority beyond their own territory for the purposes of punishing crimes which: • Violate laws of all states • Violate basic human rights • Domestic courts can prosecute non-nationals • Implications???? “Pinochet Case”

11. Kenneth Roth: The Case for Universal Jurisdiction Criticizes Kissinger’s opposition to “Universal Jurisdiction” and ICC American realists worried . . . 1) Innovations violate US sovereignty 2) Practical problems – will result in other countries prosecuting US officials • E.g. US role as “policeman” places it at risk of unfair war crimes allegations

12. Kenneth Roth: The Case for Universal Jurisdiction • Abu Ghraib? • “Haditha Massacre”?

13. 4) Conclusion: • Room for a great deal of theoretical debate about the role of “International Law” • Realists& Radicals– power is more important then rules and institutions • Liberals & Constructivists . . . ? • Rules make us more secure – we should design rules that meet our needs • E.g. Transition from sovereignty to human rights

14. 5) For Next Time . . . • October 10: Essay Writing Guidance • October 15 and 17: No Classes – Reading Week • October 22 & 24: “International Organizations and Non Governmental Organizations” • Globalization of World Politics, Chapters 18, 19 and 20. • Thomas Weiss, “The Illusion of UN Security Council Reform,”The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 26(4), (2003), Pp. 147-161. (Available through e-journals, or from the instructor.)