Abstract
International law neither exists nor is it made in a political vacuum. It would probably often make life easier for those making and interpreting international law if this were the case. However, circumstances have it that international relations are important and as this project seeks to at least consider circumstances in the real world, if not work with them, a word on the underlying international framework is necessary. Allen Buchanan has given a short reason as to the necessity of an underlying international relations framework. Paraphrasing, it is ‘an exercise in futility’ if the international relations theory one adheres to does not support the approach one has to international law. By agreeing to international relations realism, meaning that law is simply irrelevant to international politics, this project would be reduced to a hypothetical exercise of the mind with no relevance. If one accepts that international law has some sort of meaningful relationship with international relations, the starting point is very different. This is what is done in this chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Buchanan (2004), p. 29.
- 2.
Slaughter (1995), p. 503.
- 3.
Brownlie (2008), pp. 32–33.
- 4.
Henkin (1968), p. 42.
- 5.
Keohane (1997), p. 488.
- 6.
Goldsmith and Posner (2005), pp. 11–12.
- 7.
Keohane (1997), p. 489.
- 8.
- 9.
Goldsmith and Posner (2005), p. 15.
- 10.
For this summary see Goldsmith and Posner (2005), pp. 14–15.
- 11.
See Sect. 5.3.
- 12.
For a presentation of his theory of transnational legal process see Koh (1997), pp. 2645–2658. Koh also suggests empowering more actors to participate (p. 2656). This is done by the careful selection of non-state actors.
- 13.
Koskenniemi (1990), p. 9.
- 14.
See Sect. 4.1.
- 15.
- 16.
Michael Doyle is often cited for introducing these criteria. See Doyle (1983), pp. 207–208.
- 17.
Slaughter (1995), p. 510.
- 18.
Kymlicka (2001), pp. 21–22.
- 19.
CSCE (1990) Copenhagen Document http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304 Accessed 06 May 2014.
- 20.
The Copenhagen Document refers only to Part IV on minorities. Aspects of adoption are, of course, meant to apply to the whole document.
- 21.
For more on the freedom of the individual and democratic majority decision see Freeman (1999), p. 362.
- 22.
Anne Marie Slaughter has pointed out that early regime theory is now generally referred to as institutionalism. See Slaughter (1993), p. 206.
- 23.
Krasner (1982), p. 186.
- 24.
Krasner (1982), p. 186.
- 25.
For this comparison see Slaughter (1993), p. 220.
- 26.
Slaughter et al. (1998), p. 371.
- 27.
Slaughter et al. (1998), p. 371.
- 28.
Slaughter (1993), p. 206.
- 29.
Sandholtz and Sweet (2004), pp. 241–242.
- 30.
Hathaway defines costs as sanctions or harm to reputation.
- 31.
- 32.
Sandholtz and Sweet (2004), pp. 240–241.
- 33.
There are exceptions such as the International Labour Organization that accepts non-state actors as full members. Many international governmental organizations allow other organizations a minor role.
- 34.
See Chap. 4.
- 35.
Koh (1997), pp. 2612–2613.
- 36.
On a global level: the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions of the IMF, the World Bank and GATT a few years later. On a regional level: NATO, the Council of Europe and the organizations that were to become the European Union. For a nuanced discussion on the legalization of politics see Kahler (2000). Kahler focuses on legalized international institutions such as organizations and binding instruments. Robert Keohane has discussed a more general demand for international regimes. See Keohane (1982), esp. pp. 336–345.
- 37.
Slaughter et al. (1998), p. 370.
- 38.
For disagreement and complementarity see Moravcsik (1997), pp. 536–538.
References
Books and Articles
Brownlie I (2008) Principles of public international law, 7th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Buchanan A (2004) Justice, legitimacy, and self-determination – moral foundations for international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Doyle MW (1983) Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs. Philos Public Aff 12:205–235
Freeman M (1999) The right to self-determination in international politics: six theories in search of a policy. Rev Int Stud 25:355–370
Goldsmith JL, Posner EA (2005) The limits of international law. Oxford University Press, New York
Hathaway O (2002) Do human rights treaties make a difference? Yale Law J 111:1935–2042
Henkin L (1968) How nations behave – law and foreign policy. Pall Mall Press, London
Kahler M (2000) Conclusion: the causes and consequences of legalization. Int Organ 54:661–683
Keohane RO (1982) The demand for international regimes. Int Organ 36:325–355
Keohane RO (1997) International relations and international law: two optics. Harv Int Law J 38:487–502
Koh H (1997) Why do nations obey international law? Yale Law J 106:2599–2659
Koskenniemi M (1990) The politics of international law. Eur J Int Law 1:4–32
Krasner SD (1982) Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. Int Organ 36:185–205
Kymlicka W (2001) The new debate over minority rights. In: Requejo Coll F (ed) Democracy & national pluralism. Routledge, Florence, pp 15–39
Moravcsik A (1997) Taking preferences seriously: a liberal theory of international politics. Int Organ 51:513–553
Sandholtz W, Sweet AS (2004) Law, politics, and international governance. In: Reus-Smit C (ed) Politics of international law. Cambridge University Press, West Nyack, pp 238–271
Slaughter A-M (1993) International law and international relations theory: a dual agenda. Am J Int Law 87:205–239
Slaughter A-M (1995) International law in a world of liberal states. Eur J Int Law 6:503–538
Slaughter A-M, Tulumello A, Wood S (1998) International law and international relations theory: a new generation of interdisciplinary scholarship. Am J Int Law 92:367–397
Primary Source
CSCE (1990) Copenhagen Document http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304 Accessed 06 May 2014
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barten, U. (2015). The International Relations Framework. In: Minorities, Minority Rights and Internal Self-Determination. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08876-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08876-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08875-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08876-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)