Why the debate has re-emerged?
- Rising US-Iran tensions and threats of force have triggered fresh debate on international law’s relevance.
- Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022), Israeli military actions in Gaza, and Trump’s presidency fuelled this debate. Further, the illegal US actions in Venezuela and withdrawal from international organisations deepened concerns further.
- Canadian PM Mark Carney’s observation of a ‘rupture’ in global order gave this argument significant momentum.
- While international law faces its darkest phase, pronouncing its death is intellectually lazy and misleading.
The Core Norm Under Threat
- Article 2(4) of the UN charter prohibits the threat or use of force in international relations as a foundational norm.
- In 1970, international lawyer Thomas Franck argued Article 2(4) had died due to Cold War-era conflicts.
- Wars in Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Bosnia, Kosovo, Syria, and Libya all battered but could not kill it.
- Despite repeated violations, Article 2(4) continues to exist as the only framework holding powerful states accountable.
Why International Law Still Matters
- When international relations are legalised, those wielding power must justify conduct using international law frameworks.
- International law gives the powerless a semblance of agency to question those exercising public power.
- A world without this normative framework would be far more dangerous and anarchic for weaker nations.
- Even powerful states historically needed international law to legitimise their actions before the global community.
- In the 1990s-2000s, the US legally expanded the interpretation of self-defence to justify its military actions.
What Makes Today’s Violations Different
- Earlier, powerful states justified use of force through international law’s analytical framework, keeping dialogue open.
- Today’s populist-authoritarian leaders show brazenness — scarce attempt is made to justify behaviour legally.
- The US’s repeated insistence on Venezuelan oil illustrates how imperial designs now openly override legal norms.
- It is rising populist-authoritarianism, not military strikes themselves, that poses the greatest threat to international law.
International Law Is Much Larger Than the UN Charter
- International law governs trade, investment, civil aviation, maritime resources, outer space, human rights, and climate change.
- Yale professor Oona Hathaway argues that international law is flourishing as a social phenomenon beyond security norms.
- The High Seas Treaty and a Pandemic Agreement demonstrate that international law-making continues unabated globally.
- Hundreds of international courts — including the ICC and African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights – continue operating.
- The India-EU Free Trade Agreement itself exemplifies how international law-making continues despite geopolitical tensions.
- Invisible Contribution of International Law
- Much of international law operates silently and seamlessly behind the scenes, away from media headlines.
- It enables goods and people to cross borders and communication networks to transcend national geographies.
- This silent functioning of international law positively impacts the daily lives of ordinary people worldwide.
Way Forward
- Just as one does not abandon constitutional order due to an authoritarian regime, international law must be preserved.
- Pontificating on the death of international law only plays into the hands of global bullies and authoritarian powers.
- The global community must fight to preserve the liberal international law order against rising populist-authoritarian threats.
