UNITED STATES HEGEMONY AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW; ED. BY MICHAEL BYERS

Twelve leading scholars of international law and international relations consider whether the current strength of the United States is leading to change in the international legal system. This book demonstrates that the effects of U.S. domination of the foundations of international law are real, but also intensely complex. The volume stimulates debate about the role of the United States in international law and interests scholars of international law and international relations, government officials and international organizations. Half-title......Page 3 Title......Page 5 Copyright......Page 6 CONTENTS......Page 7 CONTRIBUTORS......Page 10 PREFACE......Page 17 Introduction The complexities of foundational change......Page 21 I International community......Page 43 1 The international community, international law, and the United States: three in one, two against one, or one and the same?......Page 45 The “international community”......Page 47 The place and the role of the United States in the international community......Page 55 The place and the role of the United States in international law......Page 67 Conclusion......Page 76 2 The influence of the United States on the concept of the “international community”......Page 77 The concept of “international community” in United States scholarship......Page 80 The point of departure: a realist understanding of the international legal community......Page 81 Community concepts in the age of globalization......Page 85 The institutionalist response to globalization......Page 87 The (neo) liberal response to globalization......Page 90 The postmodern critique of community......Page 95 The United Nations security system: from collective security to the “franchising” of State intervention......Page 98 From obligations erga omnes and international crimes of State to international crimes of individuals......Page 102 Conclusion: The concept of “international community” from the United States perspective......Page 106 Martti Koskenniemi......Page 111 The diversity of American academia......Page 121 Academia and governmental policy......Page 123 A American outlook?......Page 124 Redefining the problematic......Page 125 The effect of American superpower status on relations with other actors......Page 126 Volker Rittberger......Page 128 II Sovereign equality......Page 135 4 Sovereign equality – “the Wimbledon sails on”......Page 137 United States predominance and the concept of sovereign equality......Page 138 The concept of sovereignty as a legal principle......Page 139 The principle of sovereign equality......Page 140 Limitations on the exercise of sovereign rights......Page 146 The reasons for the limitations on the exercise of sovereign rights......Page 151 5 More equal than the rest? Hierarchy, equality and US predominance in international law......Page 155 Sovereign equality and factual inequality......Page 157 The double structure of sovereign equality......Page 158 The endurance of sovereign equality in a highly unequal system......Page 160 Formal equality under pressure......Page 161 Equality, consent, and the return of natural law......Page 162 Par in parem non habet imperium: the erosion of state immunity......Page 164 Groups, conditions, and the restriction of membership in the international community......Page 165 The scope of equality: loosening the restrictions on the use of force......Page 167 Sovereign equality in contemporary international law: the double challenge......Page 169 The constitutionalization of international law and the pull toward greater equality......Page 170 The expansion of international law, its politicization, and the pull toward inequality......Page 172 Hierarchy through international legal instruments......Page 176 Hierarchy through United States domestic law......Page 180 The supremacy of the US Constitution......Page 184 The United States as a world government?......Page 186 Power, institutions and the notion of government......Page 187 The United States and its exercise of governmental functions......Page 189 Government or governance?......Page 191 Sovereign equality in the face of hierarchy......Page 193 Pierre-Marie Dupuy......Page 196 Matthias Herdegen......Page 205 Gregory H. Fox......Page 207 III Use of force......Page 215 7 The use of force by the United States after the end of the Cold War, and its impact on international law......Page 217 American doctrines on the use of force......Page 218 Individual self-defense......Page 222 The terrorist acts of 11 September 2001: a turning point?......Page 224 United States practice on self-defense: an appraisal......Page 230 Military intervention by invitation......Page 231 Authorizations to use “all necessary means”......Page 233 Indefinite, implied and ex post facto purported Security Council authorizations......Page 235 Humanitarian intervention......Page 239 Armed reprisals......Page 240 The attitude of the international community......Page 241 Concluding remarks......Page 246 8 Bending the law, breaking it, or developing it? The United States and the humanitarian use of force in the post–Cold War.........Page 252 Unipolarity and the premises of the Charter peace and security system......Page 255 Bending the law: policy-oriented jurisprudence......Page 262 Breaking the law: moralistic positivism......Page 270 Humanitarian intervention and the progressive development of the law......Page 276 Conclusion......Page 279 Thomas Franck......Page 284 The action violates Article 2(4) of the Charter......Page 288 Self-defense is impermissible after an attack ends......Page 289 Self-defense is only exercisable against an attacker......Page 290 The right of self-defense is superseded after the Security Council invokes collective measures......Page 291 The United States has not provided proof......Page 292 Jochen Abr. Frowein......Page 294 Daniel Thürer......Page 297 Humanitarian intervention......Page 298 Self-defense......Page 299 International humanitarian law......Page 301 IV Customary international law......Page 305 10 Powerful but unpersuasive? The role of the United States in the evolution of customary international law......Page 307 The ineffective hegemon......Page 310 The United States’ perception of itself in the world......Page 315 The failure to assert hegemonic power does not preclude cooperation or customary law creation......Page 318 Change in the regime of customary international law......Page 322 What about compliance?......Page 333 Conclusion......Page 335 11 Hegemonic custom?......Page 337 State practice......Page 338 Opinio necessitatis......Page 340 The Martens Clause as general principle......Page 345 The normative ambiguity......Page 347 The three pillars......Page 350 Effectiveness and “good governance”......Page 353 An asymmetric principle......Page 355 Primary or secondary norm?......Page 358 A systemic approach......Page 361 Concluding remarks: custom in the era of hegemony......Page 364 Rainer Hofmann......Page 368 Andrew Hurrell......Page 372 Rüdiger Wolfrum......Page 376 V Law of treaties......Page 381 13 The effects of US predominance on the elaboration of treaty regimes and on the evolution of the law of treaties......Page 383 The impact of US predominance on the content of treaties......Page 384 The United States exerts a significant influence on the formation of international law by conventional means (treaty-making)......Page 385 The influence exerted by the United States on the formation of international law by conventional means (treaty making) has.........Page 391 The impact of US predominance on the law of treaties......Page 396 The reaffirmation of classical rules of the law of treaties in recent United States practice......Page 397 Pacta sunt servanda......Page 398 Interpretation......Page 399 Reservations......Page 401 Disregard for accepted principles of the law of treaties......Page 404 “Trumping” treaty regimes......Page 407 14 US reservations to human rights treaties: all for one and none for all?......Page 412 Reservations to treaties......Page 415 Reservations to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)......Page 421 United States reservations to the ICCPR......Page 424 Conclusions......Page 433 Jost Delbrück......Page 436 Alain Pellet......Page 438 Bruno Simma......Page 442 VI Compliance......Page 445 16 The impact on international law of US noncompliance......Page 447 Case studies of noncompliance......Page 448 1. Extraterritoriality: the Helms-Burton Act......Page 449 2. Domestic environmental law which breaches multilateral trade treaties: Section 609 of Public Law 101-162 and associated.........Page 452 3. Withholding of assessed contributions to the United Nations......Page 455 4. and 5. Noncompliance with Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and an Order of the.........Page 457 6. Use of force against Iraq, December 1998......Page 460 7. Missile attacks against the bin Lade network in Afghanistan and Sudan, August 1998......Page 462 8. Bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo crisis, March–June 1999......Page 464 Analysis of the effects on international law of the above examples of US noncompliance......Page 469 Conclusions......Page 475 17 Compliance: multilateral achievements and predominant powers......Page 476 Strengthening the international legal order: multilateral achievements and a limited role for the United States......Page 477 Peace and security......Page 479 The WTO world trade order......Page 480 The International Court of Justice......Page 486 Summary......Page 487 Unilateral environment-related trade measures......Page 488 Temptations of extraterritoriality: the Helms-Burton and D’Amato legislation......Page 489 Private law remedies for human rights violations and international crimes......Page 493 Sovereign immunity vs. human rights......Page 494 Summary......Page 495 Analysis......Page 496 Vaughan Lowe......Page 497 David M. Malone......Page 501 Trade and economic law......Page 502 Peace and security......Page 504 Christian Tomuschat......Page 507 The United States as the focus of inquiry......Page 511 The concepts of hegemony and predominance......Page 512 The contributors......Page 513 The origin and purpose of the project......Page 514 Triepel and Grewe......Page 515 The European aspect......Page 518 International community......Page 519 Sovereign equality......Page 522 Use of force......Page 524 Customary international law......Page 527 Law of treaties......Page 530 Compliance......Page 532 Outlook......Page 533 INDEX......Page 535 Successive hegemonic powers have shaped the foundations of international law. This book examines whether the predominance of the United States is leading to foundational change in the international legal system. A range of leading scholars in international law and international relations consider six foundational areas that could be undergoing change, including international community, sovereign equality, the law governing the use of force, and compliance. The authors demonstrate that the effects of US predominance on the foundations of international law are real, but also intensely complex. This complexity is due, in part, to a multitude of actors exercising influential roles. And it is also due to the continued vitality and remaining functionality of the international legal system itself. This system limits the influence of individual states, while stretching and bending in response to the changing geopolitics of our time.