International Relations 101: International Law and Organizations - Sources of International Law Treaties Custom General Principles Jus Cogens

What This Is

Sources of international law are the fundamental principles and mechanisms that govern the behavior of states and other actors in the global arena. Understanding these sources is crucial for navigating the complex web of international relations, as they shape the rules and norms that states follow and the consequences they face for non-compliance. For instance, the Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is a prime example of how international law can be used to regulate state behavior and prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Key Theories, Concepts & Thinkers

• Treaties (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties): Treaties are agreements between states that create binding obligations. They are a primary source of international law and have been used to regulate everything from arms control to human rights. Contemporary relevance: The Paris Climate Accord is a treaty that aims to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• Custom (International Court of Justice): Customary international law is based on the practices and norms that states follow over time. It is a source of law that is often used to fill gaps in treaty law. Contemporary relevance: The prohibition on torture is a custom that has been widely accepted by states and is now enshrined in international law.
• General Principles (International Court of Justice): General principles are fundamental concepts that are shared by all states and are used to guide the interpretation of treaties and custom. They include principles such as good faith, non-discrimination, and the protection of human rights. Contemporary relevance: The principle of good faith is used to interpret the Iran nuclear deal and ensure that all parties fulfill their obligations.
• Jus Cogens (International Court of Justice): Jus cogens is a set of peremptory norms that are considered to be fundamental to the international legal order. They include principles such as the prohibition on genocide, slavery, and torture. Contemporary relevance: Jus cogens norms are used to hold states accountable for serious human rights abuses and to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
• Regime Theory (Krasner): Regime theory is a framework for understanding how international institutions and norms shape state behavior. It emphasizes the importance of institutions and norms in promoting cooperation and preventing conflict. Contemporary relevance: The Paris Climate Accord is an example of a regime that aims to promote cooperation on climate change.
• International Law as Law (Kelsen): International law as law is a theory that emphasizes the importance of international law as a system of rules and norms that is binding on states. It is a key concept in understanding the sources of international law. Contemporary relevance: The Iran nuclear deal is an example of international law as law in action, as it creates binding obligations for all parties involved.
• International Law as Politics (Cox): International law as politics is a theory that emphasizes the importance of power and politics in shaping international law. It argues that international law is often used as a tool of state power and that it can be used to justify or challenge the status quo. Contemporary relevance: The use of international law to justify military intervention is an example of international law as politics in action.

Step-by-Step Analysis

1. Identify the source of international law in question (treaty, custom, general principle, or jus cogens).
2. Analyze the content of the source and its implications for state behavior.
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the source in promoting cooperation and preventing conflict.
4. Consider the role of power and politics in shaping the source and its implementation.
5. Assess the impact of the source on the global order and the interests of different states.
6. Draw conclusions about the relevance and importance of the source in understanding international relations.

Common Misconceptions

• Misconception: The United Nations is a world government.
• Correction: The UN is an international organization that provides a forum for states to discuss and address global issues, but it does not have the power to make laws or enforce them.
• Example: The UN's role in the Korean War was limited to providing a forum for states to discuss the conflict, but it did not have the power to intervene militarily.
• Misconception: Sovereignty means absolute freedom to do anything.
• Correction: Sovereignty is the principle that states have supreme authority within their territories, but it does not mean that states are free to do whatever they want without consequences.
• Example: The principle of sovereignty is used to justify state actions, but it is also limited by international law and the need to respect the sovereignty of other states.
• Misconception: All conflicts are about religion or culture.
• Correction: Conflicts are often complex and multifaceted, and can involve a range of factors including politics, economics, and ideology.
• Example: The conflict in Syria is often portrayed as a sectarian conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims, but it is also a conflict about politics, economics, and ideology.

Exam / Essay Tips

• Typical question patterns: IR exams often ask students to apply theories to case studies or to evaluate the effectiveness of international institutions and norms.
• Deploying theories: IR theories can be used to explain a wide range of phenomena, from state behavior to international institutions.
• Tricky distinctions: IR students often struggle with tricky distinctions between concepts such as anarchy and chaos, balance of power and bandwagoning, and hard power and soft power.
• Integrating historical and current examples: IR students should be able to integrate historical and current examples to illustrate the relevance and importance of international law.

Quick Practice Scenario

Scenario: Two rising powers in the Asia-Pacific engage in a naval buildup. Using realism, explain the likely outcome. Which other IR theory would predict a different outcome and why?

Answer: Realism would predict that the naval buildup is a sign of a security dilemma, where one state's actions are perceived as a threat by the other state, leading to an arms race. Another IR theory, liberalism, would predict a different outcome because it emphasizes the importance of cooperation and institutions in preventing conflict. According to liberalism, the naval buildup could be a sign of a cooperation opportunity, where the two states work together to address shared security concerns.

Last-Minute Cram Sheet

• Key theorists: Morgenthau, Waltz, Krasner, Kelsen, Cox
• Treaties: Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Paris Climate Accord, Iran nuclear deal
• Dates: 1648 (Westphalia), 1945 (UN Charter), 1990 (end of Cold War)
• Acronyms: UN, NATO, EU, ASEAN
• Trap distinctions: "NATO" is a collective defense organization, not a collective security organization – Article 5 is triggered only when a member is attacked, not every threat.
• Sources of international law: treaties, custom, general principles, jus cogens
• International institutions: UN, EU, IMF, World Bank
• IR theories: realism, liberalism, constructivism, regime theory