Government S-1740Government S-1740INTERNATIONAL LAWINTERNATIONAL LAW

Summer 2006

Professor Beth Simmonsbsimmons@latte.harvard.edu

Office: 1737 Cambridge Street, CGIS-N212

.

OUTLINEOUTLINE

I. What is International Law?II. What This Course Is (and Is Not)

AboutIII. Topics on the SyllabusIV. Goals of the CourseV. Requirements of the CourseVI. ReadingsVII. Teaching Assistants

Definition of Definition of International LawInternational Law

A body of principles, customs, and rules recognized as effectively binding obligations by sovereign states in their mutual relations.

Major QuestionsMajor Questions Why make international agreements? Why do agreements take the form they do? How and when do legal agreements affect

governments’ and others’ behavior? Does the U.S. have a real interest in IL? How universally accepted is IL? How has IL shaped international politics?

“Law is politics” - Louis Henkin

What this course IS What this course IS about…about…Public international law

Relationship between international law & international politics

What this course IS NOT What this course IS NOT about…about…

Private international law

LAW LAW SCHOOLSCHOOL

SYLLABUSSYLLABUS

Part I: Why International Law?Part II: Structures and

MechanicsPart III: The Substance of

International Legal RegulationPart IV: Towards Conclusions –

International Law and International Politics

Control Control of of

Nuclear Nuclear WeaponsWeapons

The pre-The pre-emptive use of emptive use of forceforce

Holding individuals Holding individuals accountableaccountable

The The right right to to self-self-deterdetermi-mi-nationnation

The problem of enforcing The problem of enforcing human rightshuman rights

Law and politics of intellectual Law and politics of intellectual property rightsproperty rights

ExplaininExplaining the g the

proliferatproliferation and ion and form of form of trade trade

agreemeagreementsnts

Goals: be able to…Goals: be able to… Identify and understand key international

law concepts and agreements

Articulate contending arguments present in state conflicts

Understand theories that shed light on the causes and consequences of international agreements.

Apply knowledge of the above to new situations

REQUIREMENTSREQUIREMENTS

Discussion participation – 20%3 quizzes, 10% eachFinal, August 17, 50%

Text:Text:Slomanson, Slomanson,

Fundamental Fundamental Perspectives on Perspectives on

International International LawLaw, 5, 5thth edition edition

Additional Readings and Additional Readings and ResourcesResources

Course website: http://courses.fas.harvard.edu/sum/31918

Required readings (online via course website)– Section readings– A few additional readings

Teaching Assistants:Teaching Assistants:

Asif Efrat:

efrat@fas.harvard.edu

Cosette Creamer creamer@fas.harvard.ed

u

SectionsSections

9:00-10:00

10:00-11:30

11:30- 12:30

12:30-1:30

1:30-2:30

LunchLecture

Section ACGISS-001Asif

Section DCGISS-003Cosette

Section BCGISS-001Asif

Section ECGISS-003Cosette

Section CCGISS-001Asif

Section FCGISS-003Cosette

OUTLINEOUTLINEI. The role of theoryII. Realism

A. Modern Realism’s precursorsB. Realist AssumptionsC. Critique of international law

III. Rational functionalismA. Realist rootsB. Explaining the demand for international law

IV. ConstructivismA. Critique of realism and rationalismB. The nature of politicsC. Key concept: legitimacy

V. Conclusions

The Role of TheoryThe Role of Theory

Legal Theory and Jurisprudence

International Relations Theory

Modern Realism’s Modern Realism’s PrecursorsPrecursors

Nicolo Machiavelli,1469-1527

Thomas Hobbes,1588-1679

ThucydidesCirca 400 BC

Objective, rational science of politics is possible

Anarchic nature of the international systemMain concept of politics: interest defined as

power.Agents: unitary, rational, self-regarding

(“egoistic”) statesAutonomy of political reasoning

Modern Realist Modern Realist assumptionsassumptions

Realist Critique of Realist Critique of International LawInternational Law

Law is not central to the “structure” that determines international outcomes

Law does not effectively govern international political behavior

International law is too decentralized to be effective– Legislatively– Judicially– Enforcement

Rational FunctionalismRational Functionalism

Puzzle: we observe things that don’t make sense if the realists are correct

Must be a rational explanation for international cooperation, institutions, and law

Assumptions shared with realists:– State actors are unified, rational, and self-interested– International system is anarchic

Explaining the demand Explaining the demand for international lawfor international law

The microeconomic analogy of the firmStates recognize the gains from cooperationThe problem of “market failure”The function of international law

– Clarifies contending claims– Improves information– Reduces transactions costs…making it possible to realize mutual gains

The Constructivist The Constructivist CritiqueCritique

Unanswered puzzles

Too narrow a view of politics. Politics are:– Idiographic– Purposive– Ethical– Instrumental

ConstructivismConstructivismThe social nature of politicsThe role of law

Law

Discourse, persuasion

Socialization, identity

Interests

ConstructivismConstructivism

Key concept: legitimacy– A key political resource– The answer to the puzzle of obligation

Conclusions:Conclusions: Focus here is on international relations theory, not legal theory. Purpose of IR theory is to systematize thinking about actors,

constraints, and outcomes. Realism emphasizes the central role of interests understood

largely (though not exclusively) as material power. Rational functionalism shares many of realisms assumptions,

but focuses on the possibility of joint gains as a motive for cooperation

Constructivists critique both as impoverished. They emphasize the social nature of politics, legal discourse, identity and the influence of these on interests.