International Law
John Baylis
Chapter – 16
Table of Contents
Introduction: the paradox of international law
- The default position in international relations is to assume that international law matters little to the dynamics of international politics.
- It is often believed that the power and interests of states are the main factors, while law serves the powerful or is an irrelevant curiosity.
- Despite this widespread scepticism, state behaviour often confounds this view.
- If international law doesn’t matter, why do states and other actors invest effort in negotiating and augmenting legal regimes?
- International debates often focus on the legality of state behaviour, the applicability of legal rules, and the legal obligations of states.
- Compliance with international law is high, even by domestic standards, suggesting its significance.
- The chapter introduces students to the practice of modern international law and debates surrounding its nature and efficacy.
- The text is primarily aimed at students of international politics, but also relevant for law students interested in the political foundations of international law.
- International law is best understood as a core international institution—a set of norms, rules, and practices created by states and other actors to achieve goals like order, coexistence, justice, and human development.
- International law has distinctive historical roots, and understanding these is essential for grasping its unique institutional features.
Order and institutions
- Realists view international relations as a struggle for power, with states constantly preparing for, engaged in, or recovering from war.
- War has been a recurrent feature of international life, but it is seen as a crude and dysfunctional way for states to secure security or realize their interests.
- States have focused more on liberating themselves from war than engaging in violent conflict, aiming to create some form of international order.
- Creating international institutions has been a common interest for most states to achieve order.
- International institutions are complexes of norms, rules, and practices that prescribe roles, constrain activity, and shape expectations.
- International organizations (e.g., United Nations) are physical entities with staff and offices, while institutions can exist without organizational structures (e.g., Ottawa Convention banning landmines).
- International institutions can exist without organizations, but international organizations require an institutional framework, as their existence depends on norms and rules.
- Without the UN Charter, the United Nations could not exist or function.
- States have created three levels of institutions:
- Constitutional institutions (e.g., sovereignty) that define legitimate statehood.
- Fundamental institutions (e.g., international law, multilateralism) that provide basic rules for solving cooperation and coordination problems.
- Issue-specific institutions (e.g., Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)) that apply general practices in specific realms like arms control.
- Fundamental institutions are the basic rules for solving coordination and collaboration problems in a world of anarchy.
- International law, multilateralism, bilateralism, diplomacy, and management by great powers are examples of fundamental institutions in modern international society.
- Since the mid-19th century, international law and multilateralism have been the primary frameworks for international cooperation and the pursuit of order.