Multilevel governance presents a depiction of contemporary structures in EU Europe as consisting of overlapping authorities and competing competencies. By focusing on emerging non-anarchical structures in the international system, hence moving beyond the conventional hierarchy/anarchy dichotomy to distinguish domestic and international arenas, this seems a radical transformation of the familiar Westphalian system and to undermine state sovereignty. Paradoxically, however, the principle of sovereignty proves to be resilient despite its alleged empirical decline. This article argues that social constructivism can explain the paradox, by considering sovereign statehood as a process-dependent institutional fact, and by showing that multilevel governance can feed into this process.
The standard of civilisation is most often identified as the infamous legal doctrine that legitimised imperialist rule and the exclusion of non-European non-Christian states from the international society. In disciplinary narratives of both International Relations and International Law this colonial project is usually presented as a mere interlude on the way to a mature and inclusive international society based sovereign equality as its organising principle. In line with more critical historiography, which shows how colonialism is the condition of possibility for both sovereignty and international law, this article investigates how a standard of civilisation is inherent in political legal practices of international ordering. Moreover, while usually presented as a practice of exclusion, this article will analyse the more intricate dynamic of inclusion and exclusion as a basis for international order by addressing the legal politics of subjecthood (as objects and subjects of the imagined global regime). More specifically, it will address how law operates as a technology through the interplay between a standard of civilisation, the principle of equality and legal subjectivity. The article will look into legal practices of different historical periods (in the age of discovery, during the colonial expansion, and in modern international society) to analyse the workings and transformations of these legal technologies. Together this will show how an (implicit) standard of civilisation is entrenched in the operation of law as a technology of international order. This does not stop with the universalisation of sovereign equality as the organising principle of an inclusive or 'global' international society. This article will argue that this reveals the productive power of law which functions not just as a juridical rule to regulate relations between independent and equal sovereign subjects, but operates as the norm to produce appropriate sovereigns as members of the international society.
Introduction 7. With great power, comes great responsibility: Sovereignty between autonomy and responsibility 8 3. The geo-politics of search and rescue in the Mediterranean 3 3. Moving migration control from the border to the high seas 6 3. Bilateral treaties, interception practices and the outsourcing of migration control 7 3.3 Shifting migration control to foreign territorial waters and the claiming of the sovereign other 9 3.4 Competing regimes and legal interpretation 4. The politics of law at the interplay of sovereignty and governmentality 3 5. Conclusion 7 References 9 'What men, what monsters, what inhuman race, What laws, what barbarous customs of the place, Shut up a desert shore to drowning men, And drive us to the cruel seas again.'
These things also require their material forms, their easily recognizable visible symbols, their homes. . . . [With the Peace Palace,] international justice between nations has moved into a splendid home. The proud building is standing now, visible, and tangible: Temple, symbol and workplace. At least the spirit of peace is no longer homeless.
This article analyses C.A.W. Manning’s The Nature of International Society ( NIS) by exploring the constructivist insights avant-la-lettre displayed in this not so prominent opus on international society. The article’s objective is twofold. First, to re-establish Manning’s argument, which has been distorted by its successors. That is to say, whereas often identified as a source of inspiration by subsequent generations of English School academics, the British mainstream at the same time appears to have missed out on Manning’s more metatheoretical, socio-linguistic insights. By exploring his message about the link between knowledge, language, meaning and reality, this article secondly addresses the added value of Manning’s work in terms of his analysis of the metaphor of sovereignty games. It is argued that, particularly in the analysis of the constitutive role of language, NIS provides useful insights for the reconvention project of the English School.
Abstract. The past few decades have witnessed a fundamental change in the perception of threats to the security of states and individuals. Issues of security are no longer primarily framed in terms of threats posed by an identifiable, conventional enemy. Instead, post-Cold War security policies have emphasised the global and radically uncertain nature of threats such as environmental degradation, terrorism and financial risks. What are the implications of this transformation for one of the constitutive principles of international society: state sovereignty? Existing literature has provided two possible answers to this question. The first focuses on the alleged need for states to seek international cooperation and to relax claims of national sovereignty. In Ulrich Beck's terminology, this would amount to a transformation of sovereign states into 'cosmopolitan states'. The second takes the opposite position: in response to uncertain threats states rely on their sovereign prerogatives to take exceptional measures and set aside provisions of positive law. In Beck's terminology, this would amount to the creation of a 'surveillance state'. None of these two answers, however, does justice to the complex relation between sovereignty, power and (international) law. As this article will show, the invocation of radical uncertainty has led to a transformation in sovereignty that cannot be captured in terms of the cosmopolitan/surveillance dichotomy. What is at stake is a more fundamental transformation of the way in which sovereignty is used to counter threats. Based on a study of the UN Counterterrorism Committee, this article demonstrates how state sovereignty is used as a governmental technology that aims to create proactive, responsible subjects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.