Context of International Law and Global Governance POLS1201

Liberalism: rules matter

Liberalism sees international law and institutions (like the UN) as essential for promoting peace and cooperation. States follow rules because it helps create order, predictability, and mutual benefit.

Realism: law is weak without power

Realism argues that international law only works when powerful states agree to follow it. In the end, power and self-interest matter more than legal rules, which are often ignored by strong states.

Constructivism: law is socially created

Constructivists believe international law is shaped by shared beliefs, values, and social norms. Its strength comes from how legitimate and accepted it is, not just enforcement.

Postcolonialism: law reflects Western dominance

Postcolonialism critiques international law for being built on Western values and interests, often ignoring the voices and perspectives of formerly colonized or weaker nations.

UN Charter

The founding document of the United Nations, outlining the principles of peace, sovereignty, and the use of force. It provides the legal basis for international law and UN actions.

Security Council

A powerful UN body with 5 permanent members (P5) who can veto actions. It decides on peacekeeping, sanctions, and authorizing military force—but often gets blocked by power politics.

Peacekeeping

UN operations that aim to maintain peace and prevent violence after conflicts. Peacekeepers are meant to be neutral but face limits in cases of active war or political resistance.

Sovereignty vs intervention

A key legal tension: states have the right to control their own affairs (sovereignty), but in serious crises (like genocide), others may want to intervene. This raises legal and ethical debates.

Compliance & legitimacy

Laws work best when states believe they are fair and legitimate. If powerful states ignore laws (non-compliance), it weakens trust in the legal system.

IGOs/NGOs

Intergovernmental Organizations (like the UN, WTO) and Non-Governmental Organizations (like Amnesty International) help shape global rules, monitor compliance, and support cooperation across borders.

South China Sea: China rejected tribunal = realist world

Despite losing a case under international law (UNCLOS), China rejected the ruling, showing that powerful states may ignore legal outcomes when it doesn’t suit their interests—realism in action.

Iraq (2003): No UN approval = law ignored

The U.S. and allies invaded Iraq without clear Security Council approval, bypassing international law. This damaged the UN’s authority and showed law’s limits without power behind it.

Somalia: UN peacekeeping failure

Early 1990s missions in Somalia failed due to violence and lack of coordination, exposing the limits of peacekeeping when there is no peace to keep or political agreement.

Libya: UN-backed, but controversial

The 2011 intervention was authorized by the UN under R2P, but critics say NATO went beyond its mandate, raising concerns about misuse of legal authorizations.

Syria: Blocked by UNSC = limits of law

In Syria, the UN could not act due to vetoes by Russia and China in the Security Council. This highlights how power politics can block legal action and paralyze international governance.