World Civil Society and the international rule of law

Human Rights Quarterly

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 724-737

  Christenson, Gordon A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^b School of Law   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347208327     PISSN: 02750392     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/hrq.1997.0034     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Ernest Gellner, The Civil and the Sacred, in XII THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES 301, 303 (delivered at Harvard University, 20-21 Mar. 1990) (Grethe B. Peterson ed., 1991).
2. Id.
3. ERNEST GEELNER, CONDITIONS OF LIBERTY: CIVIL SOCIETY AND ITS RIVALS 211 (1994). Democracy "lumps together participatory tribal segments, ancient or medieval city states and modern growth-oriented national or supra-national states. . . ." Id. at 212. Civil Society is linked to historical destiny in that it is not possible to return to traditional agrarian society, nor some traditional communitarianism, nor centralized authoritarian regimes because industrialism and technological innovation are "our manifest destiny." Id. at 211-13.
4. ERNEST GEELNER, CONDITIONS OF LIBERTY: CIVIL SOCIETY AND ITS RIVALS 211 (1994). Democracy "lumps together participatory tribal segments, ancient or medieval city states and modern growth-oriented national or supra-national states. . . ." Id. at 212. Civil Society is linked to historical destiny in that it is not possible to return to traditional agrarian society, nor some traditional communitarianism, nor centralized authoritarian regimes because industrialism and technological innovation are "our manifest destiny." Id. at 211-13.
5. ERNEST GEELNER, CONDITIONS OF LIBERTY: CIVIL SOCIETY AND ITS RIVALS 211 (1994). Democracy "lumps together participatory tribal segments, ancient or medieval city states and modern growth-oriented national or supra-national states. . . ." Id. at 212. Civil Society is linked to historical destiny in that it is not possible to return to traditional agrarian society, nor some traditional communitarianism, nor centralized authoritarian regimes because industrialism and technological innovation are "our manifest destiny." Id. at 211-13.
6. See id. at 15-29. Islamic law, which defines the total community, draws the loyalty of the people and can call the state to account for violations.
7. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
8. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
9. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
10. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
11. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
12. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
13. See JEAN L. COHEN & ANDREW ARATO, CIVIL SOCIETY AND POLITICAL THEORY (1992). For the influence of pluralism on democratic theories of civil society, see DEMOCRACY AND MODERNITY (S.N. Eisenstadt ed., 1992); JOHN KEANE, DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY (1988); CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE (John Keane ed., 1988); ADAM B. SELIGMAN, THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY (1992) (questioning the universalist-citizenship model as against religious and traditional prepolitical conceptions); Charles Taylor, Modes of Civil Society, 3 PUB. CULTURE 95 (1990); Michael Walzer, A Better Vision: The Idea of Civil Society, 38 DISSENT 293 (1991).
14. See ALASDAIR MACINTYRE, WHOSE JUSTICE? WHICH RATIONALITY? 209-80 (1988) (noting the remarkable, if unsuccessful, work of Hutcheson on the synthesis of moral reasoning and economic expansion).
15. See, e.g., ADAM FERGUSON, AN ESSAY ON THE HISTORY OF CIVIL SOCIETY 1767 (Duncan Forbes ed., 1966) (providing the first treatment in English of the idea of civil society based on the ethical sensibilities of individuals); MARVIN B. BECKER, THE EMERGENCE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A PRIVILEGED MOMENT IN THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, AND FRANCE (1994); Marvin B. Becker, An Essay on the Vicissitudes of Civil Society with Special Reference to Scotland in the Eighteenth Century, 72 IND. L.J. 463 (1997).
16. See, e.g., ADAM FERGUSON, AN ESSAY ON THE HISTORY OF CIVIL SOCIETY 1767 (Duncan Forbes ed., 1966) (providing the first treatment in English of the idea of civil society based on the ethical sensibilities of individuals); MARVIN B. BECKER, THE EMERGENCE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A PRIVILEGED MOMENT IN THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, AND FRANCE (1994); Marvin B. Becker, An Essay on the Vicissitudes of Civil Society with Special Reference to Scotland in the Eighteenth Century, 72 IND. L.J. 463 (1997).
17. See, e.g., ADAM FERGUSON, AN ESSAY ON THE HISTORY OF CIVIL SOCIETY 1767 (Duncan Forbes ed., 1966) (providing the first treatment in English of the idea of civil society based on the ethical sensibilities of individuals); MARVIN B. BECKER, THE EMERGENCE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A PRIVILEGED MOMENT IN THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, AND FRANCE (1994); Marvin B. Becker, An Essay on the Vicissitudes of Civil Society with Special Reference to Scotland in the Eighteenth Century, 72 IND. L.J. 463 (1997).
18. See SELIGMAN, supra note 5, at 27-28.
19. See THOMAS HOBBES, MAN AND CITIZEN (De Homme and De Cive) 113 (Bernard Gert ed., 1991) ("The original of all great and lasting societies consisted not in the mutual good will men had towards each other, but in the mutual fear they had of each other.").
20. See MACINTYRE, supra note 6, at 287-90.
21. See JOHN LOCKE, THE SECOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT AND A LETTER CONCERNING TOLERATION 44-48 (J.W. Gough ed., 1976) (explaining that "men" yield their state of nature under God's dominion and enter civil society because it provides the prospect of redress of injury and security by magistrates or others authorized); SELIGMAN, supra note 5, at 25-26 (stating that the ethical synthesis constructed by Ferguson, Hutcheson, Hume, and Smith - of reason and passion, individual and society, public and private - is no longer tenable).
22. See JAMES MADISON, THE FEDERALIST No. 10.
23. See SURYA PRAKASH SINHA, LEGAL POLYCENTRISM AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 69-147 (1996) (discussing the diversity of many different forms of civilizations and their effect on contemporary international law). For a more skeptical view of any core unity underlying diverse civilizations, see SAMUEL P. HUNTINCTON, THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER 56-78 (1996). Huntington explains that "[t]he concept of a universal civilization is a distinctive product of Western civilization." Id. at 66.
24. See SURYA PRAKASH SINHA, LEGAL POLYCENTRISM AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 69-147 (1996) (discussing the diversity of many different forms of civilizations and their effect on contemporary international law). For a more skeptical view of any core unity underlying diverse civilizations, see SAMUEL P. HUNTINCTON, THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER 56-78 (1996). Huntington explains that "[t]he concept of a universal civilization is a distinctive product of Western civilization." Id. at 66.
25. See SURYA PRAKASH SINHA, LEGAL POLYCENTRISM AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 69-147 (1996) (discussing the diversity of many different forms of civilizations and their effect on contemporary international law). For a more skeptical view of any core unity underlying diverse civilizations, see SAMUEL P. HUNTINCTON, THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER 56-78 (1996). Huntington explains that "[t]he concept of a universal civilization is a distinctive product of Western civilization." Id. at 66.
26. See ISAAK ILICH RUBIN, ESSAYS ON MARX'S THEORY OF VALUE (Milos Samardzija & Fredy Perlman trans., 1973).
27. JUSTIN ROSENBERG, THE EMPIRE OF CIVIL SOCIETY: A CRITIQUE OF THE REALIST THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 125 (1994).
28. Quigley argued that civilizations grow because their instruments of expansion - whether military, religious, political, or economic - accumulate surplus and invest it in productive innovations. Civilizations decline when groups controlling the surplus use it for their own ego-satisfying purposes such as consumption or maintenance of power instead of productivity. CARROLL QUIGLEY, THE EVOLUTION OF CIVILIZATIONS (1961).
29. ROSENBERG, supra note 15, at 131 ; see also Ellen Meiskins Wood, The Uses and Abuses of 'Civil Society,' in SOCIALIST REGISTER 1990, 60 (Ralph Miliband et al. eds., 1990); ELLEN MEISKINS WOOD, THE PRISTINE CULTURE OF CAPITALISM 34 (1991) ("It is not at all as paradoxical as it may seem that the concept of the state has been least well defined precisely where the formal separation of state and civil society characteristic of capitalism occurred first and most 'naturally . . .' [in Britain and the United States.]").
30. ROSENBERG, supra note 15, at 131 ; see also Ellen Meiskins Wood, The Uses and Abuses of 'Civil Society,' in SOCIALIST REGISTER 1990, 60 (Ralph Miliband et al. eds., 1990); ELLEN MEISKINS WOOD, THE PRISTINE CULTURE OF CAPITALISM 34 (1991) ("It is not at all as paradoxical as it may seem that the concept of the state has been least well defined precisely where the formal separation of state and civil society characteristic of capitalism occurred first and most 'naturally . . .' [in Britain and the United States.]").
31. ROSENBERG, supra note 15, at 129.
32. Rosenberg notes: Surveying the systematic character of . . . failure [of the international system to recapture control over states and markets], one is driven to conclude that the US has found in the modern clerisy of this 'American social science' a rather more serviceable ideologue than Charles V was able to command in the Dominican Order of his day. Id. at 173.
33. Id. at 131.
34. See JOHN KEANE, THE MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY (1991) (explaining how the influence of communications media in civil society links intermediate institutions with democratic institutions).
35. See HANNAH ARENDT, THE ORIGINS OF TOTALITARIANISM 473-78 (1973) (defining totalitarianism as a terror-ruled movement sustained in motion when government "presses masses of isolated men together and supports them in a world that has become a wilderness for them," destroying through their isolation any public capacities and the possibility of private life as well). But see Bronislaw Geremek, Civil Society and the Present Age, KETTERING REV., Winter 1997, at 35 (declaring that civil society in Eastern Europe successfully resisted the complete totalitarian state takeover of society); Walzer, supra note 5, at 301 (insisting that even totalitarianism needs the cooperation of private citizens in loyalty, civility, political competence, and trust).
36. See HANNAH ARENDT, THE ORIGINS OF TOTALITARIANISM 473-78 (1973) (defining totalitarianism as a terror-ruled movement sustained in motion when government "presses masses of isolated men together and supports them in a world that has become a wilderness for them," destroying through their isolation any public capacities and the possibility of private life as well). But see Bronislaw Geremek, Civil Society and the Present Age, KETTERING REV., Winter 1997, at 35 (declaring that civil society in Eastern Europe successfully resisted the complete totalitarian state takeover of society); Walzer, supra note 5, at 301 (insisting that even totalitarianism needs the cooperation of private citizens in loyalty, civility, political competence, and trust).
37. JÜRGEN HABERMAS, BETWEEN FACTS AND NORMS 367 (William Rehg trans., 1996). This sphere is constituted of and preserved by principles of constitutional rights. See id. at 368. The US Supreme Court fulfills this civic function in the pluralistic American system.
38. JÜRGEN HABERMAS, BETWEEN FACTS AND NORMS 367 (William Rehg trans., 1996). This sphere is constituted of and preserved by principles of constitutional rights. See id. at 368. The US Supreme Court fulfills this civic function in the pluralistic American system.
39. Id. at 381.
40. See id. at 379.
41. Id. at 371.
42. Id. at 373.
43. Id.
44. Id. at 375.
45. See GELLNER, supra note 3, at 193 (explaining that "Civil Society" - or separation of social and economic institutions from the state through modularity of individuals and their economic productivity through voluntary association - "can check and oppose the state . . . [and] the non-political institutions are not dominated by the political ones, and do not stifle individuals either").
46. See id. at 211-13.
47. The term is from RALF DAHRENDORF, THE MODERN SOCIAL CONFLICT 186 (1988). Various other expressions in use are "global civil society," "transnational civil society," and "international civil society."
48. See Dianne Otto, Nongovernmental Organizations in the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society, 18 HUM. RTS. Q. 107, 125 (1996) (discussing the role of human rights NGOs in a post-liberal, transnational society). Ms. Otto notes, "[a] high priority would be given to the development of global civil information systems and networks by ensuring that information technology is widely accessible." Id. at 135. Just who would ensure this availability and access is left unclear.
49. The late Professor Brierly seemingly rejected this conception, for he severely criticized Vattel for his notion that states were like individuals, free and equal in a state of nature without social bonds. J.L. BRIERLY, THE LAW OF NATIONS 37-40 (Humphrey Waldock ed., 1963). On closer inspection, however, it is clear that Brierly placed states in their own society, a communal or social theory denying the realist's anarchistic conception of sovereign states, although a form of Aristotelian society for states nonetheless.
50. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
51. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
52. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
53. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
54. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
55. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
56. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
57. See HANS J. MORGENTHAU, POLITICS AMONG NATIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER AND PEACE (5th ed. 1978); KENNETH N. WALTZ, THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1979); ROBERT O. KEOHANE & JOSEPH S. NYE, POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE: WORLD POLITICS IN TRANSITION (1977); NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM: THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE (David A. Baldwin ed., 1993); ABRAM CHAYES & ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY AGREEMENTS (1995); NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS (Robert O. Keohane ed., 1986); Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley, International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AM. J. INT'L L. 205 (1993); Kenneth W. Abbott, Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers, 14 YALE J. INT'L L. 335 (1989).
58. See Jessica T. Mathews, Power Shift, 76 FOREIGN AFF. 50 (1997).
59. See SINHA, supra note 13; HUMAN RIGHTS IN CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES: A QUEST FOR CONSENSUS (Abdullahi Ahmed An-na'im ed., 1992).
60. See Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 507 U.S. 349 (1993); Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S. 428, 440 (1989) (holding that the immunity of a foreign sovereign in US courts is presumed unless it is explicitly withdrawn by Congress); EEOC v. Arabian Am. Oil Co., 499 U.S. 244, 248 (1991) (explaining that a statute is presumed not to extend beyond the United States unless Congress explicitly stated otherwise, and accepting the background interpretation of the political independence of territorial states under customary international law); Princz v. Federal Republic of Germany, 26 F.3d 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (holding that foreign sovereign immunity is neither waived implicitly nor overridden by the doctrine of jus cogens); Smith v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 101 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 1996) (holding that statutory exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity should be interpreted narrowly and not overridden by the doctrine of jus cogens); LaFontant v. Aristide, 844 F.Supp. 128 (E.D.N.Y. 1994) (declaring that visiting head of state immunity is implied from customary international law).
61. See Sale v. Haitian Ctrs. Council, Inc., 113 S.Ct. 2549 (1993) (involving a private challenge to an official action against refugees on the high seas); United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992) (dealing with a challenge to official conduct abroad in a criminal proceeding); Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States Dist. Court, 482 U.S. 522 (1987) (involving a treaty-based challenge to a federal court order requiring defendant French owned companies to comply with discovery of documents under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. California, 509 U.S. 764 (1993) (pertaining to a jurisdictional challenge by defendant foreign reinsurers to parens patriae civil antitrust actions brought by California and other states).
62. ROSENBERG, supra note 15, at 125.
63. Id. at 126.
64. Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 (signed at New York 28 July 1994) at Annex §2, ¶ 3).
65. For example, the Bhopal class action litigation - brought first in US federal court and then before the Indian courts after forum non-conveniens dismissal, with intervention by the Indian government as parens patriae - is a case in which the claimants could have received faster payment of greater amounts had the case settlement been supervised by the federal court without the involvement of the Indian government, but that judgment was viewed by the federal judge as imperialistic. See In re Union Carbide Corp. Gas Plant Disaster, 634 F.Supp. 842, 867 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), aff'd as modified, 809 F.2d 195, 197 (2d Cir. 1987), cert, denied, 484 U.S. 871 (1987); JAMIE CASSELS, THE UNCERTAIN PROMISE OF LAW: LESSONS FROM BHOPAL 134-35 (1993).
66. HAROLD D. LASSWELL, WORLD POLITICS AND PERSONAL INSECURITY 23 (1935).
67. See Thomas M. Franck, Clan and Superclan: Loyalty, Identity and Community in Law and Practice, 90 AM. J. INT'L L. 359 (1996) (stating that individuals worldwide choose multiple identities and loyalties).
68. See HUNTINCTON, supra note 13 (stating that democratic processes in non-Western societies often do not protect human rights to the same extent as they protect commercial interests or cultural traditions).
69. See MICHAEL WALZER, ON TOLERATION 92 (1997).