Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Cognitive Foundations for Chinese Theory of International Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Chinese Theory of International Law

  • 404 Accesses

Abstract

The Chinese conception of international law is part of the Chinese theory of international law and an aspect of the theory of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Stephen C. Neff, “A Short History of International Law”, in Malcolm D. Evans, International Law (3rd ed., Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 4–5.

  2. 2.

    The starting point of modern international law is generally set in the 1648 Westphalia Peace Treaty. See: Andrew Clapham, Brierly’s Law of Nations (7th ed., Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 5–6; Heinz Duchhardt, “From the Peace of Westphalia to the Congress of Vienna”, in Bardo Fassbender and Anne Peters, The Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 623–647; Wang Tieya, Introduction to International Law, Peking University Press, 1998, p. 252. For a different view of this assertion, see Vaughan Lowe, International Law (Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 9, which states that the territorial unit and the notion of sovereignty of international law had already manifested the characteristics of the “Westphalia system” as early as in the sixteenth century, but not that they were established by the Westphalia Peace Conference.

  3. 3.

    The concept of modern international law was explicitly proposed by Bentham in 1789. See: Jeremy Bentham, Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation (printed for publication 1780, published 1789 by Clarendon Press), pp. 326–327. For the related discussion, See: MW Janis, “Jeremy Bentham and the Fashioning of 'International Law'”, 78 The American Journal of International Law 405 (1984). Bentham used the term “international law” instead of the previously used “law of all nations” or “law between nations” (Igus gentium, law of nations, droit des gens), see: James Crawford, Brownlie's Principles of Public International Law (8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 3–4.

  4. 4.

    Xu Chongli: “The Interdisciplinary Research in International Relations Theory and International Law Jurisprudence: History and Status”, World Economics and Politics, 2010 (11).

  5. 5.

    Hugo Grotius, The Rights of War and Peace, Liberty Fund, 2005, pp. 110–113, 1750–1761; Christian Thomasius, Institutes of Divine Jurisprudence with selections from Foundations of the Law of Nature and Nations, Liberty Fund, 2011, pp. 618–620; Samuel Pufendorf, On the Duty of Man and Citizen According to Natural Law (Michael Silverthorne trans., Cambridge University Press, 1991), pp. 173–174; Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Liberty Fund, 2008, pp. 68–70.

  6. 6.

    In the field of international law, positivism contains some different ideas in several aspects: (1) As an early positive international law scholar in the 18th century, Cornelius van Bynkershoek (1673–1743) believed that international law is mainly treaties and practices between nations; Cornelius van Bynkershoek, A Treatise on the Law of War (Translated from the original Latin of Cornelius van Bynkershoek, being The First Book of his Quaestiones Juris Publici, with notes by Peter Stephen Du Ponceau, Clark, NJ, The Lawbook Exchange Ltd, 2008). (2) International law is a system of rules that depends on the states’ consent; (3) International law should be the result of a determination from an external procedure. Roberto Ago, “Positive Law and International Law”, 51 American Journal of International Law 691 (1957).

  7. 7.

    Beth A. Simmons and Richard H. Steinberg (eds.), International Law and International Relations (Cambridge University Press, 2006); Shirley V. Scott, International Law in World Politics (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2004); He Zhipeng: Introduction to Philosophy of International Law, Social Sciences Literature Press, 2013, pp. 109–131.

  8. 8.

    For an analysis of this issue, for example, see Liu Zhiyun, The Development of Contemporary International Law: An Analysis from the Perspective of International Relations Theory, Law Press China, 2010.

  9. 9.

    Anne-Marie Slaughter, “International Law in a World of Liberal States”, 6 European Journal of International Law 503 (1995); Anne-Marie Slaughter, “Liberal International Relations Theory and International Economic Law”, 10 American University International Law Review 717 (1995); Andrew Moravcsik, “Liberal Theories of International Law”, in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (Cambridge University Press, 2013).

  10. 10.

    Phillip A. Karber, “‘Constructivism’ as a Method in International Law”, 94 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law) 189 (2000); Jutta Brunnee and Stephen J. Toope, “International Law and Constructivism: Elements of an Interactional Theory of International Law”, 39 Colum. J. Transnat’l L. 19 (2000); Jutta Brunnee and Stephen J. Toope, “Constructivism and International Law”, in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack, eds., Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (Cambridge University Press, 2012).

    Different from the general “constructivist” understanding of international relations, Kingsbury constructs and defines “indigenous peoples” (or “indigenous nations”) from the perspective of social environment and social process. See Benedict Kingsbury, “‘Indigenous peoples’ in International Law: A Constructivist Approach to the Asian Controversy”, 92 American Journal of International Law 414 (1998).

  11. 11.

    Davide Armstrong, Theo Farrell, and Hélène Lambert, International Law and International Relations (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 76; Shirley V. Scott, “International Law as Ideology: Theorizing the Relationship between International Law and International Politics”, 5 European Journal of International Law 313 (1994).

  12. 12.

    In this sense, law positivism is the basis of the realism. For the conscious pursuit of accurate understanding of legal concepts and facts, see Che Pizhao, “Market Access, Market Exit, and Trade Rights”, Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2004(4); Che Pizhao, “On the Application of Treaties in China”, Journal of Jurisprudence, 2005(3); Che Pizhao, “The Identification Problems in International Economic Law”, Journal of Jinan (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2007(4); Che Pizhao, “Distinction of International Conventions”, Law and Business Research (Journal of South-Central College of Political Science and Law), 1996(5); Che Pizhao, “The ‘Name’ and the ‘Reality’ of China’s (Shanghai) Free Trade Trial Zone”, Research of International Law, 2014(1).

  13. 13.

    For an interpretation of this issue from the perspective of the veins of international relations theory, see: Tang Xiaosong, “The Transformation of the Viewpoint of Realism on International Law: An Interpretation of Symbiotic Realism”, World Economics and Politics, 2008(8).

  14. 14.

    Prof. Wang Tieya, an international law jurist of China, said, “I might call myself a realist…. The reality of what I call realism is the reality of international relations and the reality that is made to be constrained by law”. Wang Tieya: An Introduction to International Law (Beijing University Press, 1998), Preface, p. 2.

  15. 15.

    Başak Çali, International Law for Interactional Relations (Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 27.

  16. 16.

    Edward Hallett Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (Macmillan & Co. Ltd, 1939). Related pedigree introduction, see: John Baylis, Steve Smith, and Patricia Owens, The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (5th ed., Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 86.

  17. 17.

    Davide Armstrong, Theo Farrell, and Hélène Lambert, International Law and International Relations (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 77–78. For a detailed explanation of Morgan’s ideas and academic sources, see: Oliver Jütersonke, Morgenthau, Law and Realism (Cambridge University Press, 2010).

  18. 18.

    See: Hendrik van Eikema Hommes, “Grotius on Natural and International Law”, 30 Netherlands International Law Review 61 (1983); Anthony D'Amato, “Is International Law Part of Natural Law?” 9 Vera Lex 8 (1989); Zhang Wenbin: “On the Impact of Natural Law on International Law”, Jurisprudence, 1993(5/6); Gao Quanxi, “Grotius and His Era: Natural Law, Rights on the Law of the Sea, and the Order of International Law”, Comparative Law Research," 2008(4); Luo Guoqiang: “On the negation of negation of natural law and the composition of international law”, Jurisprudence Review, 2007(4).

  19. 19.

    Pufendorf used as many as eight volumes to discuss the issues of natural law and international law. See: Samuel Pufendorf, Of the Laws of Nature and Nations (Oxford, 1702). The 18th-century international law scholar Fayl also elaborated international law from the perspective of natural law: Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns (1758, Liberty Fund, 2008).

  20. 20.

    W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (a facsimile of the first edition 1765–1769, University of Chicago ed. 1979), Vol. 4, p. 66.

  21. 21.

    Farhad Malekian, Principles of Islamic International Criminal Law: A Comparative Search, 2nd ed., BRILL, 2011, p. 20.

  22. 22.

    Grigory Tunkin, “Is General International Law Customary Law Only?”, 4 EJIL 534 (1993).

  23. 23.

    Adam Smith, Lectures on Justice, Police, Revenue and Arms (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1896), p. 265.

  24. 24.

    R. P. Anand, “Universality of International Law: An Asian Perspective”, in Asian African Consultative Organization, Fifty Years of AALCOL: Essays in International Law, 2007, p. 21; Yasuaki Onuma, A Transcivilizational Perspective on International Law (Martinus Nijhoff, 2010), pp. 287, 348–350; Fisch, Jörg, “Power or Weakness? On the Causes of the World Wide Expansion of European International Law”, 6 Journal of the History of International Law 21 (2004).

  25. 25.

    Kurt Wilk, “International Law and Global Ideological Conflict: Reflections on the Universality of International Law”, 45 The American Journal of International Law 648 (1951).

  26. 26.

    Hisashi Owada, Evolving World: The Universality of International Law in a Globalising World, The Cordoba Foundation Occasional Papers, Series No. 4, March 2012.

  27. 27.

    Jean-Yves de Cara, “International Trade and The Rule of Law: The Sixth Annual John E. James Distinguished Lecture, Walter F. George School of Law, Mercer University, Macon, Georgia, September 12, 2006”, 58 Mercer Law Review (2007) 1357 at 1359.

  28. 28.

    Human beings are currently in a world divided by sovereignties. This is the basic premise of the thinking of issues of international relations and international law. Madeline H. Morris, “Universal Jurisdiction in a Divided World: Conference Remarks”, 35 New England Law Review 337 (2001); Myres S. McDougal, and W. Michael Reisman, “The Changing Structure of International Law: Unchanging Theory for Inquiry”, 65 Colum. L. Rev. 811 (1965); Rosalyn Higgins, Conflict of Interests: International Law in a Divided World (Dufour Editions, 1965); Robert Kagan, “Power and Weakness”, Policy Review (June and July, 2002), pp. 3–28; Olaf Dilling, “If I had a Hammer: A Review of Kagan’s ‘Power and Weakness’ ”, 3 German Law Journal 12 (2002). Adam Roberts and Benedict Kingsbury (eds.), United Nations, Divided World: The UN’s Roles in International Relations (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 1994); Kasses’s International Law was named The International Law in a Divided World when it was just published. Antonio Cassese, International Law in a Divided World (Oxford University Press, 1987); Only when it was revised in 2005, that it was renamed International Law.

  29. 29.

    This phenomenon is the “Fragmentation” phenomenon of international law that has been revealed by scholars. For the official reports at the UN level, see: Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law: Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission Finalized by Martti Koskenniemi, International Law Commission, A/CN.4/L.682, 2006; see also Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2006, vol. II, Part Two; adopted by the International Law Commission at its Fifty-eighth session, and submitted to the General Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering the work of that session (A/61/10, para. 251).

  30. 30.

    Erika de Wet and Jure Vidmar (eds.), Hierarchy in International Law: The Place of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 1.

  31. 31.

    Richard K. Gardiner, International Law (Pearson Longman, 2003), p. 10.

  32. 32.

    In the field of Anglo-American law, the most influential and most conducive to the formation of the conception of a legal system is Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, published between 1765 and 1769; Because this book is concise and light (compared to other works), it has been brought to the United States in large numbers and has been widely used by American law theory, law education, and judicial practice. Greg Bailey, “Blackstone in America: Lectures by An English Lawyer Become The Blueprint for a New Nation's Laws and Leaders”. http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/spring97/blackstone.html.

  33. 33.

    Malcolm Shaw, International Law (6th ed., Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp. 5–7.

  34. 34.

    Peter Van den Bossche and Werner Zdouc, The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text Cases and Materials (3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 40–59; Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 73–75; Mitsuo Matsushita, Thomas J. Schoenbaum, and Petros C. Mavroidis, The World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2006), pp. 23–25.

  35. 35.

    Marco Sassòli, Antoine A. Bouvier, and Anne Quintin, How Does Law Protect in War?: Cases, Documents and Teaching Materials on Contemporary Practice in International Humanitarian Law (3rd ed., ICRC, 2011), Vol. I, Chap. 4, pp. 1–4; Dieter Fleck, The Handbook of International Law (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 27–28, 29–31.

  36. 36.

    Yoshifumi Tanaka, The International Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 30.

  37. 37.

    Although the WTO Agreement, the Rio Declaration, and the 21 Century Agenda all express the same emphasis on sustainable development, there are still conflicts between different treaty systems. Patricia Birnie, Alan Boyle, and Catherine Redgwell, International Law and the Environment (3rd ed., Oxford University Press, 2009), p. 754; Philippe Sands, Jacqueline Peel, Adriana Fabra, and Ruth MacKenzie, Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 800, 806–808.

  38. 38.

    Yoshifumi Tanaka, The International Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 323.

  39. 39.

    Larissa van den Herik and Carsten Stahn (eds.), The Diversification and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law (Martinus Nijhoff 2012).

  40. 40.

    Professor Koskenniemi, who has long paid attention to this issue, and others believe that the fragmentation of international law is a real problem, but there is no need to worry too much about this issue.

    Martti Koskenniemi and Päivi Leino, “Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties”, 15 Leiden Journal of International Law 553 (2002); Tomer Broude, “Keep Calm and Carry On: Martti Koskenniemi and the Fragmentation of International Law”, 27 Temple International & Comparative Law Journal (2013); Sean D. Murphy, “Deconstructing Fragmentation: Koskenniemi’s 2006 ILC Project”, 27 Temple International & Comparative Law Journal (2013). Some scholars are optimistic that ILC can reduce the fragmentation of international law by establishing the rank of international law, Christian Leathley, “An Institutional Hierarchy to Combat the Fragmentation of International Law: Has the ILC Missed an Opportunity?”, 40 International Law and Politics 259 (2007), the author believes that this idea does not meet the state-led international social system. The actors of international relations must build relevant institutes basing on the reality of the fragmentation of international law. Mark Klamberg, “What are the Objectives of International Criminal Procedure?: Reflections on the Fragmentation of a Legal Regime”, 79 Nordic Journal of International Law 279 (2010).

  41. 41.

    Sundhya Pahuja, Decolonising International Law: Development, Economic Growth and the Politics of Universality (Cambridge University Press, 2011).

  42. 42.

    I. A. Shearer, Starke's International Law (11th ed., Butterworths, 1994), pp. 347–348.

  43. 43.

    Luis Eslava and Sundhya Pahuja, “Between Resistance and Reform: TWAIL and the Universality of International Law”, 3 Trade, Law and Development 103 (2011).

  44. 44.

    It is worth noting that the United States withdrew from the UN Economic and Social Council, which mainly took care of developing countries, in 1985. The forum for developing countries to advocate their own interests is still limited. Stephen D Krasner, Structural Conflict: The Third World against Global Liberalism (University of California Press, 1992), esp. Chaps. 1–3, 8–9.

  45. 45.

    Joseph A. Camilleri and Jim Falk, The End of Sovereignty? The Politics of a Shrinking and Fragmenting World (Edward Elgar, 1992), esp. Chaps. 1–3, 8–9.

  46. 46.

    David Held believes that the development of international law in the fields of economy, environment and human rights constitutes a new context of understanding for sovereignty, and the conception of liberalism has greater appeal. David Held, “The Changing Structure of International Law: Sovereignty Transformed?”, in David Held and Anthony McGrew (eds.), The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate (2nd ed., Polity Press, 2003), pp. 162–176, esp. 172. David Armstrong believes that contemporary international law should be regarded as a law between peoples, not between nations; it should be regarded as a law that pursues justice, not a law that seeks order. In this sense, international law must be transformed into the world law in true sence. David Armstrong, “Law, justice and the idea of a world society”, 75 International Affairs 547 (1999); Steven Wheatley has proposed that in the light of the “democratic deficit” existing in traditional international law, global law norms are needed to intervene the traditional national reserved fields, change the originally core status of the sovereign wills in international affairs, and increased the activity ability of the United Nations, the European Union and other international organizations. Steven Wheatley, “A Democratic Rule of International Law”, 22 European Journal of International Law 525 (2011). For a detailed discussion of global law, see Rafael Domingo, The New Global Law (Cambridge University Press, 2010). These assertions do reflect the reality at some extent, but they also need to consider the contradictions in these fields that cannot be resolved through long-term negotiations between the relevant countries. For example, there has long been no progress in the climate negotiations from the Copenhagen conference to the Warsaw conference; the WTO Doha Round of negotiation in the economic field has lagged far behind the expected negotiation process; Criticism and resistance and counter-criticism between countries in the field of human rights, and so on. Whether or not the global law can be achieved depends on the choice between common conceptions and sovereign wills. See Andrew Heywood, Global Politics (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), pp. 339–344.

  47. 47.

    Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (Harvard University Press, 1949), pp. 112–117, 373–376; Mario Prost and Paul Kingsley Clark, “Unity, Diversity and the Fragmentation of International Law: How Much Does the Multiplication of International Organizations Really Matter?” 5 Chinese Journal of International Law 341 (2006).

  48. 48.

    As early as 1964, during the Cold War, Friedmann proposed that he expects international law to form a clearer norms rank and a more effective punishment mechanism. Wolfgang Friedmann, The Changing Structure of International Law (NY: Columbia University Press, 1964), p. 88.

  49. 49.

    J. H. H. Weiler and Andreas L. Paulus, “The Structure of Change in International Law or Is There a Hierarchy of Norms in International Law?”, 8 EJIL 545 (1997), at 565.

  50. 50.

    Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties; for related comments, see Zhang Xiaojian: “On the Definition and the Recognition Criteria of the International Compulsory Law”, Jurist, 1996(2).

  51. 51.

    Louis Henkin, International Law: Politics and Values (Martinus Nijhoff, 1995), pp. 38–39.

  52. 52.

    Robert Jennings and Arthur Watts, Oppenheim's International Law (9th ed., Longman, 1992), pp. 7–8.

  53. 53.

    Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99.

  54. 54.

    Blaine Sloan, “The United Nations Charter as a Constitution”, 1 Pace Y.B. Int’l L. 61 (1989); Bardo Fassbender, “The United Nations Charter as Constitution of the International Community”, 36 Colum. J. Transnat’l L. 529. (1998); Bardo Fassbender, The United Nations Charter as the Constitution of the International Community (Martinus Nijhoff, 2009).

  55. 55.

    Jürgen Habermas, Plea for a Constitutionalization of International Law, XXIII World Congress of Philosophy, Athens, 2013.

  56. 56.

    Pierre-Marie Dupuy, “The Constitutional Dimension of the Charter of the United Nations Revisited”, 1 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 1 (1997).

  57. 57.

    Josef L. Kunz, “General International Law and the Law of International Organizations”, 47 American Journal of International Law 456 (1953).

  58. 58.

    Daniel Bodansky and J. Shand Watson, “State Consent and the Sources of International Obligation”, 86 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law) 108 (1992); Matthew Lister, “The Legitimating Role of Consent in International Law”, 11 Chicago Journal of International Law 663 (2011); Samantha Besson, “The Authority of International Law—Lifting the State Veil”, 31 Sydney Law Review 343 (2009).

  59. 59.

    Harold Hongju Koh, “Why Do Nations Obey International Law?”, 106 The Yale Law Journal 2599 (1997).

  60. 60.

    Abram Chayes and Antonia Handler Chayes, The New Sovereignty (Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 109–134.

  61. 61.

    Thomas M. Franck, Fairness in International Law and Institutions (Clarendon Press, 1995), p. 7.

  62. 62.

    Bruno Simma, “Universality of International Law from the Perspective of a Practitioner”, 20 European Journal of International Law 265 (2009).

  63. 63.

    Chapters 5–8 and 12 (Security Council’s responsibilities and working procedures in the aspect of world peace and security) of the UN Charter, particularly Article 2(6): shall ensure non- member states of UN to follow these principles in the necessary range for the maintenance of peace and security. As a result, it can be inferred that the Security Council can act on all countries in the world in terms of peace and security.

  64. 64.

    Articles 23 and 27 of the UN Charter, in particular Article 27, paragraph 3. Prof. Hans Goschler paid close attention to this issue for a long time and studied it in depth. Related discussion, see: Hans Köchler, “The Voting Procedure in the United Nations Security Council”, in: Hans Köchler, Democracy and the International Rule of Law. Propositions for an Alternative World Order. Selected Papers Published on the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United Nations (Vienna and New York: Springer, 1995), pp. 85–116; Hans Köchler, Security Council Reform: A Requirement of International Democracy.

    http://hanskoechler.com/Koechler-Security_Council-Reform-CSF-TurinV3-25Aug07.pdf; Hans Köchler, “The United Nations Organization and Global Power Politics: The Antagonism between Power and Law and the Future of World Order”, 5 Chinese Journal of International Law 323 (2006); Hans Goschler: “The Power Ambiguity in International Relations and the Future of the United Nations”, Translated by Sun Lu, Journal of Social Sciences of Jilin University, 2013(3).

  65. 65.

    Article 10–14 of the UN Charter.

  66. 66.

    Article 92–96 of the UN Charter, Articles 34–37 and 65 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

  67. 67.

    Yuval Shany, “No Longer a Weak Department of Power? Reflections on the Emergence of a New International Judiciary”, 20 European Journal of International Law 73 (2009).

  68. 68.

    Li Haopei: The Concept and Origin of International Law, Guizhou People's Publishing House, 1994, pp. 29–30.

  69. 69.

    James Cameron and Kevin R. Gray, “Principles of International Law in the WTO Dispute Settlement Body”, 50 International and Comparative LawQuarterly 248 (2001); Caroline Henckels, “Overcoming Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO – FTA Nexus: A Potential Approach for the WTO”, 19 European Journal of International Law 571 (2008); Songling Yang, “The Key Role of the WTO in Settling its Jurisdictional Conflicts with RTAs”, 11 Chinese Journal of International Law 281 (2012).

  70. 70.

    Malcolm Shaw, International Law (6th ed., Cambridge University Press, 2008), p. 2.

  71. 71.

    Donald R. Rothwell, Stuart Kaye, Afshin Akhtarkhavari, and Ruth Davis, International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 6–11; Donald Earl Childress, III and Donald Earl Childress, The Role of Ethics in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 267–268; Antonio Cassese, Realizing Utopia: The Future of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 575–578; Theodor Meron, The Humanization of International Law (BRILL, 2006).

  72. 72.

    See Zeng Lingliang, “The Trend of Humanistic Development of Modern International Law”, China Social Sciences, 2007(1); Liu Sun, “The Trend of Humanizing in International Law and the Innovation of International Investment Law”, Jurisprudence Research”, 2011(4); He Zhipeng, “Globalization and International Law’s Humanism Turn”, Journal of Social Sciences of Jilin University, 2007(1).

  73. 73.

    Jan Klabbers, International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 9–12.

  74. 74.

    International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect (2001), ICISS website: http://www.iciss.ca/pdf/Commission-Report.pdf; Anne Orford, International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect (Cambridge University Press, 2011).

  75. 75.

    For the discussion about this problem, see: Carsten Stahn, “Responsibility to Protect: Political Rhetoric or Emerging Legal Norm? ”, 101 American Journal of International Law 99 (2007); Ayça Çubukçua, “The Responsibility to Protect: Libya and the Problem of Transnational Solidarity”, 12 Journal of Human Rights 40 (2013); Jeremy Sarkin, “Is the Responsibility to Protect an Accepted Norm of International Law in the post-Libya Era?: How its Third Pillar Ought to be Applied”, 1 Groningen Journal of International Law 11 (2012); Mehrdad Payandeh, “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility? The Concept of the Responsibility to Protect within the Process of International Lawmaking”, 35 The Yale Journal of International Law 469 (2010); Paul R. Williams, J. Trevor Ulbrick, and Jonathan Worboys, “Preventing Mass Atrocity Crimes: The Responsibility to Protect and the Syria Crisis”, 45 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 473.

  76. 76.

    Yoram Barzel, A Theory of the State: Economic Rights, Legal Rights, and the Scope of the State (Cambridge University Press 2002), Chaps. 1–3.

  77. 77.

    From Kant to Habermas and Held, many philosophers have put forward the idea of a cosmopolitan, but they all have not built a bridge from the reality to the ideal in the face of the split conceptions and institutions between nations. Immanuel Kant, Political Writings (HS Reiss ed., Cambridge University Press, 1970), pp. 41–53, 87, 105; Jürgen Habermas, “Toward a Cosmopolitan Europe”, 14 Journal of Democracy 86 (2003); David Held, Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995); John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 4–5. Habermas at the 21st World Congress of Law Philosophy and Social Philosophy, presented his “Global Citizens” paper and was supported by David Held and other scholars. It also sparked heated discussions. For related comments, see Stéphane Courtois, “Habermas’s Cosmopolitan Perspective on Individual Rights and the Nation-State: A Critical Assessment”, 2 Social and Political Philosophy 86 (2006); R. Fine, and W. Smith, “Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of Cosmopolitanism”, 10 Constellations 469 (2003). Rawls referred to the idea of the world’s citizens in the Law of All Nations, but did not follow this “great harmony” approach, but rather endorsed the non-interference policy and believed that forces can only be used under the premise of self-defense. John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 82–83. This view is consistent with the realist international relations theorists.

  78. 78.

    Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (McGraw-Hill, 1979), pp. 102–104; Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, 1977, pp. 140–141. Noam Chomsky, “Notes on Anarchism (1970)”, Barry Pateman (ed.) Chomsky on Anarchism, 2005, p. 123.

  79. 79.

    Hans Morgenthau, Politics among Nations (7th ed., Kenneth Thompson and David Clinton eds., McGraw-Hill, 2005), pp. 504, 511; [USA] Kenneth Waltz: Realism and International Politics, translated by Zhang Ruizhuang, Liu Feng, Peking University Press, 2012, p. 49.

  80. 80.

    Andrew Clapham, Brierly’s Law of Nations (7th ed., Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 80–85.

  81. 81.

    Accurate understanding of international law with a scientific attitude is a prerequisite for evaluation. Martti Koskenniemi, “International Law in a Post-Realist Era”, 16 Australian Yearbook of International Law 1 (1995).

  82. 82.

    The most influential scholar who regard international law as the positivist moral is Austin, John Austin, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (Wilfred E. Rumble ed., Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 112, 124, 175; “International Comity” originally as a commonly used term in private international law, was advocated by Dutch jurist Ulrich Huber and American jurist Joseph Stroy, Ernest G. Lorenzen, “Huber’s De Conflictu Legum”, 13 Illinois Law Review 375 (1919); Joseph Story, Commentaries on The Conflict of Laws, § 33 (1834); Joseph H. Beale, A Treatise on the Conflicts Of Law, Vol. 1 § 6.1 (1935); The Classic Case is Hilton v. Guyot, 159 US 113 (1895). Some International trials discussed the importance of international law as an interstate comity: the Belgian Parliament Case (Parlement Belge, [1880] LR 5 PD 197); the case of asylum (Colombia v. Peru, Asylum Case [1950] ICJ Rep. 266, at 277). For related discussions, see L. Oppenheim, International Law (H. Lauterpacht ed., 8th ed. 1955), p. 34; Harold Maier, “Extraterritorial Jurisdiction at a Crossroads: An Intersection between Public and Private International Law”, 76 American Journal of International Law 280 (1982); Wang Tieya, An Introduction to International Law (Peking University Press, 1998), pp. 10–12.

  83. 83.

    The Western jurisprudence works on comprehensive studies generally avoid the definition of the law, but rather introduce the doctrines of the various schools, such as James Penner, David Schiff, and Richard Nobles (eds.), Introduction to Jurisprudence and Legal Theory: Commentary and Materials (Oxford University Press, 2005), pp. 6–9; Raymond Wacks, Understanding Jurisprudence: An Introduction to Legal Theory (3rd ed., Oxford University Press, 2012); Brian Bix, Jurisprudence: Theory and Context (6th ed., Carolina Academic Press, 2012). Or describe the attributes that the law should have, such as the minimum regulatory and definite nature, containing ethnic element, and having the meaning of value judgment, Michael Freeman, Lloyd’s Introduction to Jurisprudence (8th ed., Sweet & Maxwell, 2008), pp. 40–44; Most law definitions in China revolve around sovereign states, such as Zhang Wenxian, Study of the Category of Legal Philosophy (China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2001), p. 32; Yao Jianzong (ed.), Jurisprudence (China University of Political Science and Law Press 2006), p. 68.

  84. 84.

    John Austin, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (Wilfred E. Rumble ed., Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 21–22.

  85. 85.

    H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 209–210.

  86. 86.

    George Kennan, American Diplomacy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), p. 95.

  87. 87.

    Nico Krisch, “International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order”, 16 European Journal of International Law 369 (2005).

  88. 88.

    Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (7th ed., Kenneth Thompson and David Clinton eds., McGraw-Hill, 2005), pp. 285–286.

  89. 89.

    There are many international norms that fall into this category. A large part of the multilateral conventions that the government of the People’s Republic of China has ratified and acceded to belong to this category, including the 1875 Metric Convention, the 1929 Convention on the Weight Manifestation of Shipping Significant Packages, the 1929 Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Air Transport and its Protocols, the 1954 International Agreement of the International Refrigeration Institute, the 1964 Universal Postal Consortium Organizing Act, and the 1966 International Ship Load Line Convention and Its 1971, 1975, and 1979 Amendments, the Convention on International Waterway Surveying Organization, the 1969 Convention on Tonnage Measurement of International Ships, the Agreement of International Telecommunication Satellite Organization, the 1972 Convention on the Rules for International Preventing Collisions at Sea, and so on. International treaties in the field of civil and commercial affairs, such as international treaties on bills of exchange, promissory notes and cheques, are also not of moral nature.

  90. 90.

    Covey T. Oliver, “International Law, Morality, and the National Interest: Comments for a New Journal”, 1 American University International Law Review 57 (1986); A Boldizar, “Ethics, Morals and International Law”, 10 EJIL 279 (1999).

  91. 91.

    Nicolas Politis, La Morale Internationale (New York: Brentano’s, 1944) and Book Review by John B. Whitton, 45 Columbia Law Review 808 (1945).

  92. 92.

    Umut Özsu, “Politis and the Limits of Legal Form”, 23 European Journal of International Law 243 (2011).

  93. 93.

    Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), ICJ Reports 1986, p. 14.

  94. 94.

    John H. Jackson, “The Crumbling Institutions of the Liberal Trade System”, 12 Journal of World Trade Law 93 (1978); John H. Jackson, “The WTO Dispute Settlement. Procedures: A Preliminary Appraisal”, in Jeffrey J. Schott (ed.), The World Trading System: Challenges Ahead (Institute for International Economics, 1996), pp. 153–164; For related commendations, see: Robert Howse, The WTO System: Law, Politics & Legitimacy (Cameron May, 2007), pp. 194–197; Matthew S. Dunne III, “Redefining Power Orientation: A Reassessment of Jackson's Paradigm in Light of Asymmetries of Power, Negotiation, and Compliance in the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System”, 34 Law & Pol’y Int’l Bus. 277 (2002).

  95. 95.

    Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (Harvard University Press, 1945), p. 328.

  96. 96.

    For the challenges that globalization poses to international law, see Andrew Byrnes, Mika Hayashi, and Christopher Michaelsen (eds.), International Law in the New Age of Globalization (Martinus Nijhoff, 2013); For the global governance and constitutionalism caused by globalization, See, for example, Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Joel P. Trachtman, Ruling the World: Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2009); for an overview of this, see: Frederic Megret, “Globalization and International Law”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009), Vol. IV.

  97. 97.

    Corfu Channel, United Kingdom v Albania, Judgment, Merits, [1949] ICJ Rep 4. Albania refused to perform after the verdict was reached until Albania negotiated with the United Kingdom in 1992 and finally resolved in 1996. Constanze Schulte, Compliance with Decisions of the International Court of Justice (Oxford University Press, 2004), chapter 3; Connie Peck and Roy S. K. Lee (eds.), Increasing the Effectiveness of the International Court of Justice (Martinus Nijhoff), p. 334; Math Noortmann, Enforcing International Law: From Self-help to Self-contained Regimes (Ashgate Publishing, 2005), p. 122. The case of Iceland’s jurisdiction over fisheries in 1974 and Iran’s decision on hostages in 1980 also adopted a refusal attitude. John O'Brien, International Law (Cavendish, 2001), p. 665.

  98. 98.

    For the relevant conditions prior to 2010 and the basic situation of the cases, see: Approaches to Solving Territorial Conflicts: Sources, Situations, Scenarios, and Suggestions (The Carter Center, 2010), pp. 4–9. Since then, the International Court of Justice has concluded the maritime dispute between Peru and Chile (Maritime Dispute, Peru v. Chile), January 27, 2014.

  99. 99.

    Roda Mushkat, “State Reputation and Compliance with International Law: Looking through a Chinese Lens”, 10 Chinese Journal of International Law 703 (2011); Andrew T. Guzman, “Reputation and International Law”, 34 Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 379 (2005), George W. Downs and Michael A. Jones, “Reputation, Compliance, and International Law”, 31 Journal of Legal Studies S95 (2002); Rachel Brewster, “Unpacking the State’s Reputation”, 50 Harvard International Law Journal 231 (2009).

  100. 100.

    Kenneth W. Abbott and Duncan Snidal, “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance”, 54 International Organization 421 (2000); Andrew T. Guzman and Timothy L. Meyer, “International Soft Law”, 2 Journal of Legal Analysis 171 (2010); Jon Birger Skjærseth, Olav Schram Stokke, and Jørgen Wettestad, “Soft Law, Hard Law, and Effective Implementation of International Environmental Norms”, 6 Global Environmental Politics 104 (2006). Guzman even believes that soft law can transcend national consent:Andrew T. Guzman, “Against Consent”, 52 Virginia Journal of International Law 747 (2012).

  101. 101.

    Max Weber, Economy and Society (Guenther Roth & Claus Wittich eds., Univ. of California Press 1978), p. 883–886. For comments, see David M. Trubek, “Max Weber on Law and the Rise of Capitalism”, 1972 Wis. L. Rev. 720 (1972); Sally Ewing, “Formal Justice and the Spirit of Capitalism: Max Weber’s Sociology of Law”, 21 Law & Society Review 487 (1987).

  102. 102.

    A. L. Stinchcombe, “Certainty of the Law: Reasons, Situation-Types, Analogy, and Equilibrium”, 7: 3 Journal of Political Philosophy 209 (1999).

  103. 103.

    Paul Heinrich Neuhaus, “Legal Certainty versus Equity in the Conflict of Laws”, 28 Law and Contemporary Problems 795 (1963).

  104. 104.

    Ofer Raban, “The Fallacy of Legal Certainty: Why Vague Legal Standards May Be Better for Capitalism and Liberalism”, 19 Public Interest Law Journal 175 (2010); Bärbel Dorbeck-Jung, “Challenges to Max Weber’s Conceptualization of Legal Certainty in the Area of Economic Globalization”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association, TBA, Berlin, Germany, Jul 25, 2007.

  105. 105.

    Carlo Focarelli, International Law as Social Construct: The Struggle for Global Justice (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 55–64.

  106. 106.

    Leon Goldensohn (Robert Gellately ed. and intro.), The Nuremberg Interviews (Vintage Books, 2004), pp. xxviii-xxix.

  107. 107.

    Antony Aust, Handbook of International Law (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 381–382.

  108. 108.

    Wang Shengzu (ed.), The History of International Relations, World Knowledge Press, 1995, Vol. IV, pp. 86–101, Vol. VII, pp. 1–51; Liu Debin (ed.), The History of International Relations, Higher Education Press, 2003, pp. 330–340; Yuan Ming (ed.), The History of International Relations (2nd ed.), (Peking University Press, 2005), pp. 105–129, 200–221.

  109. 109.

    Theodor Meron and Jean Galbraith, “Nuremberg and Its Legacy”, in John E. Noyes, Laura A. Dickinson, and Mark W. Janis, International Law Stories (Foundation Press, 2007), pp. 13–43.

  110. 110.

    Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1948), p. 209. Each version afterward bears this view.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Center of Legal Theory, School of Law, Collaborative Innovation Center of Judicial Civilization, Jilin University, Changchun, China

    Zhipeng He

  2. Jilin Academy of Social Sciences, Changchun, China

    Lu Sun

Authors
  1. Zhipeng He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lu Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhipeng He .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Law Press China and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

He, Z., Sun, L. (2020). The Cognitive Foundations for Chinese Theory of International Law. In: A Chinese Theory of International Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2882-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2882-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-2881-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-2882-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation