UNIVERSITÄT WIEN Deniers of International Law, 1795-1914 Mag. iur Paul Hahnenkamp, BA submitted in February, 2017 supervisor: Univ-Prof. Dr. Miloš Vec study programme: Doktoratsstudium Rechtswissenschaften This is an outline of my dissertation project at the Institute for Legal and Constitutional History of the University of Vienna. I am examining the deniers of international law mainly jurists who doubted the autonomy of international law or even its legal normativity at all, particularly in the 19th century. It aims to provide an overview about the theoretical positions of the deniers and the reactions of the international community. Index I. Content II. Hypothesis III. Method IV. Structure V. State of Research VI. Sources (selected) VII. Literature (selected)
Deniers of International Law 1795-1914 I. Content Nowadays, the reference point and system international law seems to be globally accepted to govern in its classical understanding relations among states and other legal subjects. In contrast to domestic legal systems, international law features characteristics like decentralized law-making, the lack of concise jurisdiction systems or different ways to enforce the legal rules without the use of central executive organs. These specifics have always been a starting point for various kinds of criticism and doubts about the concept of international law. Political realists tend to describe the relations between states as a struggle for power, rather than a legal system; nationalists refer to the weakness and inaction of international law. Even today, academic scholars like Jack Goldsmith and Eric Posner 1 or diplomats like John R. Bolton 2 deny the legal normativity of international law, although such opinions represent a strong deviation from the current mainstream scholarship. With their extreme insights, they stand in the tradition of the so-called deniers of international (= Leugner des Völkerrechts). Legal history shows that the denial of international law is a phenomenon that has existed since the modern era respectively since the birth of the classical law of nations. Already Hugo Grotius wrote in the Prolegomena to his famous work De iure belli ac pacis about those authors who despise the law of nations in such a way that they disclaim its existence. 3 This vague thought eventually proved right. The diverse group of deniers in history doubted the autonomous existence of international law or its legal normativity at all. They qualified international law for instance as äußeres Staatsrecht 4, as positive international morality 5 or as Klugheitsregeln 6 and developed a variety of doctrinal and normative approaches to international law and its construction. 1 Jack Goldsmith/ Eric Posner, The Limits of International Law (Oxford 2005). 2 see eg. John Bolton, Is there really Law in International Affairs? In: Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems 10, 1 (2000) pp. 1-47. 3 qui hanc iuris partem ita contemnerent, quasi nihil eius praeter inane nomen existeret, Hugo Grotius, De iure belli ac pacis (Amsterdam 1660) p. 4. 4 Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, (Berlin 1821) 330-340. 5 John Austin, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, (London 1832) p. 132. 6 Adolf Lasson, Princip und Zukunft des Völkerrechts, (Berlin 1871) p. 49. 2
My dissertation project will examine the deniers of international law, particularly in the 19 th century. Mainly, I want to reconstruct the contemporary discussion about the denial of international law. While in the first half of the century, the theoretical foundations of international law were still debated, in the second half the historical-positivistic approach got more dominant. In each period, the label Leugner (or denier ) of international law was used to reject unfavorable positions concerning international law. The main debates occur in the German and English speaking countries. When applying this approach, it is also necessary to grasp the theoretical positions of the deniers, which will be another basic aspect of this dissertation. To approach the theoretical positions of the deniers also means to examine and question their definitions of law and normativity as well as their concepts of state. Furthermore, I want to inquire, which alternative solutions or explanations they suggest. Immanuel Kant, Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel, John Austin or Adolf Lasson are just a few scholars, who were labeled as deniers of international law. II. Hypothesis The debate about denying international law reveals a lot of insight in the (spawning) discipline of international law. In the end of the 18 th century/ the beginning of the 19 th century, scholars of international law are (again) occupied with the search for a convincing concept of normativity and autonomy. In the middle of the 19th century, the struggle for scholarly unity is already fought more fiercely, deniers are clearly indicated as such and sometimes stigmatized. In the end of the 19 th century and the beginning of the 20 th century, deniers of international law like Adolf Lasson and his successors are outsiders/ not part of the international community. Thus, my main hypothesis is that the debate about denying and defending international law is part of the institutionalization of the discipline international law. The construction of international law can therefore be perceived in the exclusion of deviating opinions like for example Hegel's approach of äußeres Staatsrecht, which concedes with the emerge of a historical-positivistic view on international law. 3
III. Method In order to examine this institutionalization hypothesis I will focus on the doctrine of international law in the 19 th century and compare the different treatises and other scholarly sources from German and English speaking countries. French and Dutch sources might be consulted as well. Examining those sources does not only mean to juxtapose them. I would like to contribute to a more accurate image of the construction of international law in the 19th century and shed light on a possible striving for power and legitimacy in the context of institutionalization. I will apply methods of discourse history to show the constructing and excluding force of the doctrine. Therefore, it is necessary to stay as close as possible to the contemporary discussion. My dissertation will thus deal with the debate about the existence of international law, which starts in this dissertation at the end of the 18th century in German international law scholarship in the context of the steady rise of historic-positivistic views on international law. My whole work should feature this essential discussion with a strong focus on the scholars, who depending on the perspective negate the autonomy or legal normativity of international law. Existence of international law or other key words and Quellenbegriffe like Leugner des Völkerrechts or Deniers of international law are essential for the analysis of the contemporary discussion. In this sense, I will also apply some methodological approaches of conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte). IV. Structure My structure is shaped by the course of the contemporary discussion. My dissertation will consist of three parts. The first one will deal with the pluralism of normative approaches or search for normativities in the doctrine of international law. The concrete debate about the Leugner des Völkerrechts only starts with the (likely) emergence of historical-positivistic approaches. International jurists at the end of the 19 th century reject the older natural law tradition based on Thomas Hobbes or Samuel Pufendorf, phrases like [das] Völkerrecht leugnen appear. 7 Meanwhile, also other theoretical approaches about the foundations of international law's normativity come into play: Some of them refer to new natural law systems (Kant, Metz, 7 see eg. Georg Friedrich von Martens, Einleitung in das positive Europäische Völkerrecht auf Verträge und Herkommen gegründet (Göttingen 1796) p. 9; Freiherr Dietrich Heinrich Ludwig von Ompteda, Litteratur des gesammten sowohl natürlichen als positiven Völkerrechts. Erster Theil (Regensburg 1785) pp. 14, 298. 4
Fichte) others to more historical/organic methods (Hugo, Hegel, Puchta). For the Anglo- American scholarship, there are mainly the positions of John Austin and followers, which challenge the legal quality of international law. Although their analytical approach differs essentially from the metaphysical systems forwarded by Hegel and disciples, it is still apparent that the supposed connection between power and law and its implications for the normativity of international law reminds of the Hegelian state concepts. However, also those new positions were increasingly rejected, like a quote of Hans Christoph Ernst von Gagern shows: Somebody who doubts, feuds with or breaches international law itself, turns away from humanity. 8 The second part will feature the debate about the deniers of international law in the context of new self-confidence and ongoing institutionalization of the discipline. Around the middle of the 19th century many scholars of international law reject doubts about its existence more fiercely; some even dedicate theoretical works to manifest international law s foundations. 9 On the other hand, particularly Hegel's and Austin's concepts are modified and therefore refreshed. The probably most famous denier of international law Adolf Lasson is also strongly influenced by the Hegelian view of Äußeres Staatsrecht. 10 These developments also have to be seen against the background of a rise in interstate relations. 11 The ongoing and accelerated transformation from agricultural to industrial societies, the end of economic protectionism and the following rise of trade relations lead to a way more solid international legal system in the last quarter of the 19 th century. The foundations of the first international organizations, the installment of international law chairs at universities or the appearance of international legal journals depict this process. The third and last part will cope with the ongoing exclusion of those scholars. Towards the end of the 19 th century it comes apparent for the vast majority of legal scholars that international law is a normative legal system. Still doubting jurists face allegations of weak or illogical concepts of law and state. They are treated as outsiders, the mainstream critique is fierce on them. 8 Wer das Völkerrecht an sich bezweifelt, befeindet, verletzt: entkleidet sich der Menschlichkeit. ; Hans Christoph Freiherr von Gagern, Critik des Völkerrechts. Mit practischer Anwendung auf unsre Zeit (Leipzig 1840) p. 2. 9 Carl von Kaltenborn-Stachau, Kritik des Völkerrechts. Nach dem jetzigen Standpunkte der Wissenschaft (Leipzig 1847). 10 Adolf Lasson, Princip und Zukunft des Völkerrechts (Berlin 1871). 11 Edward Keene, The Treaty Making Revolution of the Nineteenth Century. In: The International History Review 34, 3 (2012) pp. 475-500. 5
In this sense, I want to frame this process stigmatization of the deniers. The theoretical concepts of those deniers on the other hand correlate to the emergence of nationalism in this period. In an outlook, I also want to examine the relation between the breaches of international law in the beginning of World War One and the theoretical positions of denial. Not by coincidence, former can be interpreted in the continuity of latter and of the rejection of basic principles of international law. V. State of research The research about the deniers of international law is not the brightest issue of modern historiography yet, although they have been mentioned in many works and textbooks so far. Already Wilhelm G. Grewe, who finished the vast part of his work during World War II a work regarded as a milestone for the legal history in this field, elaborately writes about the deniers: He characterizes Hobbes as an ancestor of a very heterogeneous group of thinkers, which will later be called Leugner des Völkerrechts. 12 In addition, Grewe also categorizes Pufendorf, Thomasius and other German natural law scholars as well as John Austin or James Lorimer from the Analytical School as deniers of international law. He mentions Hegel s legal philosophy and extreme theories taken by followers of him like Adolf Lasson or Erich Kaufmann. 13 In Arthur Nussbaum s A Concise History of the Law of Nations from 1950, again John Austin is tagged as a denier, who grasped international law as positive morality instead of a legal system. 14 Nowadays, the newest works of the history of international law do mention the issue of denial positions, but mostly in the way of a sub-clause to bigger narratives about for example the emerging positivism, the theory of sources or the construction of the discipline itself. In several papers and monographs, efforts are taken to categorize the deniers of international law. Still, those classifications are only partly working and not satisfactory yet. For example, the German scholar Heinhard Steiger, who gives the most elaborate account of the Leugner des Völkerrechts in newer research and who tries to arrange the deniers chronologically as well as content-wise, is also only able to give an overview without going into details of legal 12 Ahnherr jener in sich sehr heterogenen Gruppe von Denkern, die man später die,leugner des Völkerrechts genannt hat, Wilhelm Grewe, Epochen der Völkerrechtsgeschichte (Baden-Baden 1984) 409-410. 13 Grewe, Epochen der Völkerrechtsgeschichte, 591-597. 14 Arthur Nussbaum, A Concise History of the Law of Nations (New York 1950) 224. 6
or state concepts. 15 Frequent narratives about the deniers are the ones from the natural law scholars, who do not accept the independence of international law from ius naturae; the Hegelians, who exaggerate the notions of states until there is no more ground for interstate law; or the scholars, who accommodate international law only with moral but not legal normativity. 16 The only attempt to classify the deniers of international law on a large scale so far was made by Gustav Adolf Walz, a German scholar of international law in the interwar period. His book Wesen des Völkerrechts und Kritik der Völkerrechtsleugner, published in 1930, was part of the Handbuch des Völkerrechts edited by Fritz Stier-Somlo and was therefore entirely focused on the theoretical positions without giving historical background. Bearing an uncritical opinion towards Hegel s positions and making career under the National-socialist regime later on, this work has to be approached with care. 17 15 Heinhard Steiger, Völkerrecht. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (Hg.), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland. Band 7: Verw-Z (Stuttgart 1992) pp. 97-140. 16 e.g. see Harald Kleinschmidt, Geschichte des Völkerrechts in Krieg und Frieden (Tübingen 2013) pp. 387-388; Martti Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations. The Rise and Fall of International Law (Cambridge 2002) pp. 32-37, 182-184; Kristina Lovrić-Pernak,,Morale internationale und,humanité im Völkerrecht des späten 19.Jahrhunderts. Bedeutung und Funktion in Staatenpraxis und Wissenschaft ( Studien zur Geschichte des Völkerrechts 30), (2013) pp. 28-31. Miloš Vec, From the Congress of Vienna to the Paris Peace Treaties of 1919. In: Bardo Fassbender, Anne Peters (Hg.), Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law (Oxford 2012) pp. 654-678. 17 Gustav Adolf Walz, Wesen des Völkerrechts und Kritik der Völkerrechtsleugner (Fritz Stier-Somlo, Handbuch des Völkerrechts. Grundbegriffe und Geschichte des Völkerrechts. Erste Abteilung A, Stuttgart 1930). 7
VI. Preliminary Table of Contents Introduction: Deniers of International Law Narratives, Classifications, and the Power of Discourse 1. Adolf Lasson and the Principle of International Law in 1871 2. Deniers of International Law in Modern Historiography 3. Constructing the Discipline from a Negative Perspective Part I: International Law s New Foundations from Late Enlightenment to Mid-19 th Century 1. Starting the Debate: The Historical-Positivistic Approach towards International Law and its Framing of Deniers 2. New Natural Law Concepts around 1800 3. The Hegelian Conflict between State & International Law 4. The Austinian Challenge to International Law Part II. Denying and Defending the Law in the Second Half of the 19 th Century: International Law in Context of Institutionalization 1. New Self-Confidence in Theory Kaltenborn s Kritik des Völkerrechts 2. Neo-Austinian Concepts in the second Half of the 19 th century 3. Hegel Reloaded 4. International Law subdued to International Morality Part III: Deniers of International Law in the late 19 th Cntury Between Stigmatization and Nationalism 1. Denial and Nationalism 2. Stigmatization and Exclusion 3. Deniers of International Law on the Eve and during World War One 8
VII. Preliminary Timeline winter term 2015/16 - specification of the topic - research - completion of the mandatory courses in the beginning of the Doktoratsstudium - presentation of the dissertation project summer-term 2016 - research for the general introduction and the first part - completion of another seminar in the field of legal- and constitutional history winter-term 2016/17 - completion of the general introduction including state of research, method & hypothesis - closure of the Dissertationsvereinbarung - regular feedback talks with the supervisor summer-term 2017 - completion of the first part of the dissertation - research for the second part - regular feedback talks with the supervisor winter-term 2017/18 - completion of the second part of the dissertation - research for the third part - regular feedback talks with the supervisor summer-term 2018 - completion of the third part of the dissertation - regular feedback talks with the supervisor winter-term 2018/19 - merge of the three parts - completion of a first preliminary version of the dissertation - process of editing of the preliminary version - submission of the edited version - defensio 9
VIII. Sources (selected) Ompteda, Literatur des gesammten sowohl natürlichen als positiven Völkerrechts (1785) G.F. Martens, Versuch über die Existenz eines positiven europäischen Völkerrechts (1787) G.F Martens, Precis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l Europe (1789) Kant, Zum Ewigen Frieden (1795) Fichte, Grundlagen des Naturrechts nach Principien der Wissenschaftslehre (1796) Kant, Metaphysik der Sitten (1797) Hegel, Die Philosophie des Rechts (1821) Klüber, Europäisches Völkerrecht (1821) Metz, Grundriß der practischen Philosophie (1827) Puchta, Das Gewohnheitsrecht (1828) Austin, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (1832) Henry Wheaton, Elements of International Law (1836) Puchta, Cursus der Institutionen (1841) Pütter, Beiträge zur Völkerrechts-Geschichte und -Wissenschaft (1843) Fallati, Die Genesis der Völkergesellschaft (1844) Whewell, Lectures on Systemic Morality (1846) Kaltenborn, Kritik des Völkerrechts (1847) Austin, Lectures on Jurisprudence (1861) J.S. Mill, Austin on Jurisprudence (1863) Bluntschli, Das moderne Völkerrecht (1868) Trendelenburg, Lücken im Völkerrecht (1870) Lasson, Princip und Zukunft des Völkerrechts (1871) 10
Seydel, Grundzüge einer allgemeinen Staatslehre (1873) Holland, The Elements of Jurisprudence (1880) Philipp Zorn, Die deutschen Staatsverträge (1880) Jellinek, Die rechtliche Natur der Staatsverträge (1880) Albert Zorn, Grundzüge des Völkerrechts (1903) Bergbohm, Theorie des Völkerrechts (1901) Oppenheim, International Law (1905-6) IX. Literature (selected) Capps/Rivers, Kant s Concept on International Law Foucault, Die Macht des Diskurses Galindo, Martti Koskenniemi and the Historical Turn in International Law Grewe, Epochen der Völkerrechtsgeschichte Hueck, Pragmatism, Positivism & Hegelianism in the 19th century Koskenniemi, From Apology to Utopia Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations Landwehr, Historische Diskursanalyse Mälksoo, The Science of International Law and the Concept of Politics Nuzzo/Vec, Constructing International Law. The Birth of a Discipline Schröder, Recht als Wissenschaft Steiger, Was heißt und zu welchem Zweck studiert man Völkerrechtsgeschichte? Steiger, Völkerrecht. In: Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe Vec, From the Congress of Vienna to the Paris Peace Treaties of 1919 Ziegler, Völkerrechtsgeschichte 11