Liberal Internationalism, Radical Transformation and the Making of World Orders

Abstract

In a highly readable and often immersively engaging book, Yale law professors Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro have narrated a long history of international law’s ideas about war with one primary goal in mind: using history to excavate the 1928 Paris Peace Pact’s central importance in the building of a New World Order. They seek to protect the gains of this New World Order and to use their method of ‘looking back’ to draw attention to the current threats to the ‘postwar consensus on the illegality of war’ and to ‘chart a path ahead’ (at 415–416). The book’s narrative spans an impressive temporal and geographic range, beginning briefly with a hot summer day in Paris in 1928, then back to a night in 1603 off the Strait of Singapore, right up to the contemporary period, focusing on the South China Sea in 2015, Crimea in 2014 and Iraq and Syria from 2014 to today. The authors narrate the ideas and biographies of ‘fathers’ of the Old and New World Orders including the familiar (Hugo Grotius, Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen, Hersch Lauterpacht) and the less well known (Nishi Amande, James T. Shotwell, Salmon Levinson). It is these great men, categorized as either ‘Interventionists’ or ‘Internationalists’ who, through force of will and the faith in their ideas, coupled with elite access and sometimes frenetic writings, changed the course of legal order in the world. This cast of characters is arranged as heroes and villains (‘arraigned’ may be more appropriate for the latter) in the epic, transformational struggle to displace one ‘universe’ with another (at xv). The object of this progressive struggle was the ‘outlawry of war’ – its prohibition, casting it out from the legal toolkit of sovereign state policy, consigning it to a dark past of interstate violence. It is important to bear in mind that this ‘struggle’ is one that is openly engaged with by the authors themselves, not simply the jurists and ideas men they seek to portray. This is history in the service of clear normative commitments. The book’s monumental spatio-temporal reach, epic narrative and archival mastery in the first two parts, and its empirical turn in the final, third part, invite cross-disciplinary dialogue and insights that require us to step outside the comfort of disciplinary enclosures and unnecessarily bounded specialization. The book justifies reflection and debate not just among international legal scholars but also among colleagues in history, international relations and political science. It achieves what its marketing material promises: genuine provocation through the boldness of its vision. Holding these values in the frame, then, I explore in this review essay the authors’ upfront normative commitments to the New World Order, focusing on questions of method and theory in international law’s historical and empirical ‘turns’. Following a summary of the book’s structure and principal arguments, I examine the implications of narrating history in epochal form, highlighting the promises and pitfalls of such ‘progressive’ accounts, and then interrogate the turn to empirical data as a way of understanding the New World Order. I argue that the ‘bird’s eye view’ (at 311) that dominates the perspectival orientation of the book’s third part performs what Donna Haraway identifies as a ‘god-trick’ of appearing to see everything from nowhere.1 I draw upon interdisciplinary insights from science and technology studies (STS) to invite reflection on what is at stake when we use ‘science’ to see the world with this kind of eye. Such ‘scientific’ ways of knowing are attempts to ‘prove’ through ‘attestive witnessing’ and claim to transcend politics, but STS scholars have long demonstrated that there is always a politics to the production of knowledge.2 In the next section, I attend to some of the more obvious gaps in their narrative, focusing on the decolonization revolution and more ‘radical’ world reordering movements and then address the endurance of justifying war through law. I close with reflections upon the following we the authors’ of and of world what a legal revolution and and by is it and we in these questions of from a that its force in in this In the book’s we that the Old World Order was the that war a of was an of (at xv). of the legal the Old World Order with the not is to be the of but also is the of war’ (at of war is with to of in an world. we that in order to the of legal for the of war the This that legal in that to for when was in war (at The also be to be through the of from another the right to its was the and engaged in the not to the legal of the a the to – that interstate by (at the of this the authors us through the Old World Order. In what is a but on of the authors’ mastery of archival is what they argue is a an from their a of the upon war be and the of when – that through (at they first war in justifies the right to war the on the that as one of (at this they that their upon in of and that of international law of (at It that war may have but that to war they that their was in some way (at the authors to a of war – that the to to war always war always the of a (at in they war to the of law and order in the Old World Order, war was law and (at in in this Old World Order it was to these – just and – and to be (at I to the implications of the sovereign right and of in the of this review in this the authors the that from this legal to focusing on the to in war that from an war (at the and legal of the of and the often of as the of In the for this they us that not to be as an – an and upon a of was not the Old World was its was an to the world for seek to of to in the book as (at then to what the of the book, the or the from Old to New World Order. its part, this is beginning with the of the to of and with the in the of in is some of the book’s an of an ‘outlawry of war’ by such familiar as following this book’s to be as James T. and Salmon of the their Old World Order Grotius, the of a of legal but they to often the of and the of to have it in legal we heroes and their not with the of the Paris Peace on a hot summer day in 1928 and the of the of war It was they in their ideas to legal – a – that they the of the Old to New World Order. This was the legal for the not to war the but to an The Pact’s a legal for the in war and a monumental of legal at its are we to see the Paris Peace Pact’s as a of with the was and its was and from a for the and in the that in in what the of the an primary be to the to of The Pact’s of the legal for at the and highly of In their the the of this New World Order (at of the Old World with the the of (at this and the and the the authors draw in of these In the Old World Order, the to use force a to as and the of in the New World Order, the on force as a the of and the illegality of in form, the of to us that this legal or to these the authors clear that it is not the legal but also legal that the In we the of the New World Order, and this third part heroes to their and upon an ‘bird’s eye view’ of and (at The authors argue that not the the was The not by is it is to a law and not with the of a law. They with (at The revolution through the of the of and empirical to the of this In this part, from the of and of this order ‘prove’ the by this ‘outlawry (at the book with the of and the of its of world It is an that the narrative of is as the of the with a of the world and not the of the and Old World Order, but This Old and New World Order is not by the of but also by and China as a to the of also a but not in the of the on the of the to to a central in the legal order in the of these the to the New World Order from to this and turn the is the world order by the to and its their to the and that (at The authors that there is a but it is the of by the 1928 and and and a (at The world order by the Paris Peace and by the they was on an understanding that be more and with one another in of their this order is it about of and (at In this world will to not as a of but also as a for (at The use of as a to the force of that the authors argue is important in the of state by The is with a two war is either legal or with the for and we have faith that the New World Order, with of its is to (at The that the authors have in their history is that and it and ideas the – as the of their – we (at in a normative for an international law in these dark of international law’s are to the They are by or upon international law’s order ‘turns’. in of it was with the of World I that the way to a law of international for contemporary World I demonstrated that the Such of the world we the of these we that the at the of an by the of to use force was is this but it be by the that law the of the international of we are a part, and on we a and international The of these is and that World I have the of that force to world order through the on the use of The book a of international law to the Paris Peace and the by the ideas and of that in the Such was not or but it are with a history, the of first in book of a history of by and heroes Such through of in the past and a is the not the of the this the of narrating is not by The it is simply the force of the Paris Peace the more of in the of the authors that the was they argue that it less of a an to the by the a more that out of the of World one that the of In the war as a of law’s The war to the it the of In it the of was and the of its This was by the movements that in the movements not to war but also the war as and The of these not be from they and to by reordering and in the of Such a the of World I implications for the way we the of more one of a a of from this book’s we are to and in the of international law’s this is by the of the it changed international law for the it the beginning of a from the Old to the New World Order, the of legal is as the Paris Peace and its in another part of this faith in is through the of the narrative of the book for the the ideas and of the Old World Order and the of that world This is a history that with the of with a is in order to legal to the use of force the book back to the of and the of ideas in of international law through at the authors the of the form, demonstrated by their use of at the close of of these parts, the part of a or It is in these two that the of their narrative and it is the of the of such the narrative the of men is by by the of and often are the of their and more of when they of what they are of is the of such for be as we that there one is but attempts to the to the have an of historical one to this book an at a history is an from the book’s the of the authors the Old World Order as legal in the and the next on the of the (at then, is the of a narrative, and this claim that the narrative its there are to the that this narrative the to a history, not the that the authors to the of ways of and understanding the including and contemporary I the to on an that in the book and that be by international the or the to the of by the of the science of the This by to the of the narrative in the of the In the book’s turn to in to the from Old to New World Order be as an to the past of history by to be in accounts, It be in in that this of a of is at the of claim of the book from this then, is that it of a to the narrative but one that with the science of the the empirical method a progressive of past Such an be to be the of past the from narrative as part of a of in historical in the and the is in an of and with the they on the of its ideas, and the this the consensus about the and of their be and international law’s of and this another for engaging in a dialogue about the is the service of the of interdisciplinary is as a disciplinary a of what the important questions are to in international law. The book’s turn to the empirical as a to us to about the implications of such a – in the upon an and the to ‘scientific’ ways of knowing the world. we are to the of science to a of Old and New World we is and to that it is it it is It through and The of STS to what – – about this of science and the through empirical the politics of the through and In a of the of the STS Donna Haraway attention to the of everything from to the of and this is as it to the of data the of and and The empirical data to the in the New World Order of the of the revolution It is such a of it is in of the of the force of and of their and in contemporary of and that and that and the of have to be by a on and as of and to the world they the of this are the of the or are by not at such data an and appearing to ways of knowing the the politics of their and such ways of knowing the world are a – a – of the to and Such ways of knowing the In the of this book, this world the revolution for its heroes to be the narrative, then, the turn to attention to the of a and their politics of when and are we that such of method by the narrative of the of this such coupled with narrative, the of they the of a of the their Haraway we from a of that not but also the and and In there a on the to see from the and the we not to such they are in they are to of the and of They are to of through and The have a to be on to the and its – – are they to more of the not simply to have or in The turn to a eye of the world its and the of knowing from a of and an a kind of history such is to and of a we to the that be and through such ways of and The book’s third part and the turn to the empirical is then, not we of the ideas, or heroes of to the of war a legal but we also this New World Order as with of its we narrated some of the ideas and of the 1928 and and – we on the authors’ faith in the New World Order of these and movements have the of the international legal and they have in sometimes that have with the revolution in legal more a in this book – the decolonization This is the narrative to a that justifies a of the and of the New World Order, is we are that of the and an impressive of (at and of great and we are with an that decolonization as of and by It is as to the World and The legal of this that a in the of international the was a of for legal in the New World Order. ideas and their a from the world of great and as scholars are was not or and the struggle the of and the of by as a force for the of of legal scholars to the struggle for decolonization and that the that the its and the of such to the authors’ is the of – as or – that the book’s and narrative of the of in the Old World Order to the the of by the World out an path for legal order that for to legal the on the use of The for great to war the an and to be the of not as an of but also as a of the force of of and to be to history by the of the with in a for the of to of the in the and of such – – not with the of the on it was the that and the for what – the that from international of and the of use of the from the of the the The to be to the international of the and World it as that the of their In was an of the of legal order and This was by the of great to with in the for and in the The right to force on the of coupled with the to of World the have the of to their in their with the world. the was not just by at of legal order and but also by the often of an that to as such a be two to be the of an international the of a of international for the and the a the for that the not of The the with the international on and have such the of the that their international with often a for the of and in the international to the this of law an of in the World – from the of the decolonization revolution the to the the of and the of law as a James that in the of war a for as they have to and to the of the of international In these then, decolonization not and its the force of legal order The of international law that in what often as an of and the of be as of the transformational politics of attempts to the New World Order from the of the The out of this is part of the narrative of the New World Order that not its heroes and villains a – in that this order also through its faith in and legal Such a narrative the of ‘Interventionists’ ‘Internationalists’ and the of that be by and another – that it was not just the of but also the that to be – was with the ‘outlawry by in this book but as and of This of a that and was at and movements that this the and of and attempts to war’ as part of the to the and from the book’s They not to the following World I but the of and and today. ideas and ways of understanding revolution and legal that the of what the authors revolution to for international of these and their to the politics that the of war the New World legal the to the of I to the authors’ that their right to we this that to the authors us to that the transformational the Old and New World Orders is by the of a war as legal and war as its the to use force is to the on not to at this that international law be that the of the be as to be in we as out in of the structure of legal we there is – the are – law it is on – to with have to and in the of and The normative force of as clear as an of the is there is always the about an The that justifies the about also justifies it by the of the that as to protect the In we that the that on this and authors the for this of the by the and the current and its law two one that is and to be to and the that is it is of a of the of this is not some or faith on the part of legal it from and to that legal will the for they The of legal will not just themselves, or but also and law this we are with a that is always also a what is not and the the prohibition, the more the the authors the to the New World Order of the up the this is as an when up to the – the their always as to use then the on war (at but also we to with this and with we are back to the of war the authors’ clear commitments to international and the of the of their us the of the authors is a when force is and is when force is is a of is its or it be to and appropriate us for the but the New World Order is by as as the the of these be the for or we that the of a of the New World Order, but a through legal and upon the but the of also be to its of the legal order or to a in such it out that a of force is to a – the of the – the the use of force to the of the state an what as in the Old World Order. It will be and its will on the politics of international law – its – in It also out that not and not have a when we the or of the not questions of the authors’ and of legal we another of the of international law and their in the authors’ that the of is the of an international legal (at and in order to the Old World Order, be on on interstate a of the the of international – of order is among sovereign as we to the of another of the Old World Order, we that not at this at the of in the – of a of law that for relations as to two the of the of a structure the sovereign and the and international law is of as a of the The is with and is of and by the law of and be to of to with The of the be and with of the through disciplinary of This of to international law in not in the that in up to the international law and the of order as one about interstate relations and the of then, us to about the of was and and to be and sometimes or through of war or In with on the of international law is to be to the of – that what is for of to history from the of the to international law and are to the to the of with the and of such in us to the authors’ part of the book about the disciplinary force of the of and the of the world order of the and of the Old World Order that with the New World Order. is in this it an not as a of but also as a for (at the authors are clear international law is a one and the and the two legal for (at The of the New World Order be through from legal The in as its are not and it is from from the of sovereign order that the international legal Such not require the disciplinary of war for as of disciplinary are to world of – not war but not but on prohibition, it war the of legal order and it the of through a and of the of and is not just up by villains Schmitt, but it also in the that the book’s narrative to for dark to be obvious by The is a of we to we are and we to It important questions of theory and method in the historical and empirical that their sometimes in It also reflection on the of and on the politics of normative in a in the of law and as the of its the book a for this of for the we to and the ways we the through law. This narrative is an of heroes and villains cast in a struggle for the of the international legal order and its In this epic it is and a that us a it is empirical and This also a claim to and the progressive of and in that the of method is always we one historical for the of law and legal we one path to the and we one for understanding the about war we are from or that on another be the The of an the or of some ideas The is not a that is to and we not have to turn in to the politics and of method for the with legal for in legal by not simply the of order among but also the of that international law and The authors that world from (at but they that it is what and what on international law’s This with its of of the of the of and the of The ideas may be but the – to – its and a close to the politics of by some of the villains of the Old World Order. the of not for the by such of a of The is and its is the force of This also be of the authors’ of the politics of the The authors see the by the the but this is the of the by – or – by and the of the or the use of force the of the The in the right to and the of their and a on state the of a to the be as a of war and long as be by This about the force of the to of an of the authors’ vision. that they as a to international relations that (at in and it and ideas we (at In we also that that law and law ideas and that in of is at then, is not just the of the commitments of the New World Order, as the authors at stake is the to law to transformational we this – of or law – to see the struggle not the of and on their – when and This we are not or the that this book that we are to for the ways we to see the world and the we in of the we this us back to Haraway and for an of in the world through is always a of the to see and of the in