International Law in the Modern

International Law in the Modern World

The role of international law has become more imperative and important in our world than ever before. Possibly one of the most prominent issues and the greatest threat to world peace today is the problem of nuclear proliferation. This is one of the areas of particular concern for International law and international legal institutions. In an article entitled Building Global Peace in the Nuclear Age by David Krieger (2006), the author correctly states that, "The Nuclear Age has made peace an imperative. If we fail to achieve and maintain global peace, the future of humanity will remain at risk" (Krieger). The maintenance of global peace is the fundamental task and challenge of internationals legal institutions

However, this is not the only aspect that is of concern for international law. There are many other issues and problems in the modern, globalized and interconnected world. One of these is the issue is human rights. In this regard, the problem gender rights and the horrors of genocide have become a particularly worrying concern internationally.

The modern world is characterized by greater contact and interaction between nations. However, at the same time the contemporary world is also a place of greater complexity and competition for scarce resources, as well as increasing conflict. This in effect means that international law must face extremely difficult and complex situations in maintaining the ideals of peace and order. One needs only to mention modern concerns such as the increase in terrorism to substantiate this view.

The phrase international law was coined as early as 1789 by Jeremy Bentham. (Horton) the idealist view of international law was to develop after the Second World War and in the many department of the United Nations. In essence, international lawyers felt that they ".... were part of a cosmopolitan project that had a long pedigree sometimes derived from Enlightenment philosophy..." (Koskenniemi). The central aims of international law is to act as support for the Untied Nations and various human rights frameworks as well as supporting "...special rules for trade law, environmental law and work for a proliferating number of international institutions since the 1950's..." (Koskenniemi).

The central point is that, in this context, International law can be described as the system of law that brings nations together in legally binding agreements. This also requires shared and agreed upon values and standards. "International Law" can refer to a number of legal disciplines. These include public international law, which relates to issues surrounding the United Nations and the Geneva conventions; private international law or conflict of laws and a category known as supranational law. Supranational, as the name implies, is defined as,

Extending beyond or transcending established borders or spheres of influence held by separate nations" (Supranational).

However, many of these high ideals have not yet been accomplished in the present century. In fact, international law has failed to a certain extent, particularly in the area of international conflict. One of the central problems that International law faces is the usurpation of its objectivity and impartiality by the politics and agendas of 'superpowers" or influential countries. This can be seen for example in the events leading up to the recent Iraq war. In this case, the position held by international law, as defined by the United Nations, was overruled by the United States. Therefore, the standing of international law has been reduced in many cases by the complexity of international politics and the often convoluted and intricate views and agendas of influential countries like the United States, the Soviet Union and China. This has played a major part in the effectiveness of international law in recent years. This aspect has also curtailed the ability of international law to deal with the various complex conflicts and issues in the world, such as the conflict in Darfur.

In essence, the area of international conflict is a cardinal area in which international law is likely to fail in achieving its aims of equality and peace in the future. As long as international law and the bodies that represent this law are not heeded or of they lose their inability to function and apply the law through the interference of powerful countries, then this will not bode well for the future.

This is an important issue and a number of commentators and critics have decried this loss of respect for international law. One commentator refers to the words of the politician and sociologist, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who said that, "...there is nothing quite to compare with the falling from the American mind of the idea of the law of nations" (Kinsley). He also stated that,

At the beginning of Gulf War II, we forgot... international law. We forgot international law once again. When the U.N. Security Council would not play ball, we declared that our own invasion of Iraq was justified as a sovereign act of long-term self-defense against potential weapons of mass destruction, by the human rights situation within Iraq,

Kinsley).

Therefore, this is a cardinal area of international law that is in danger in the present age.

On the other hand, there are areas of international law that have been more successful and which may improve in the future. The nature of international communication and the common views held in most countries about the nature and importance of human rights has led to successful cooperation between countries in terms of various types of legal concerns. The judgment by British law on the immunity of Pinochet is one example. Pinochet, once President of Chile, was known for his repressive and inhumane regime. The British case against Pinochet was to make judicial history as it was the first time that a dictator who was known for human rights abuse had been arrested on the principle of universal jurisdiction. The principle of universal jurisdiction, "...allows national courts to try cases of the gravest crimes against humanity, even if these crimes are not committed in the national territory and even if they are committed by government leaders of other states" (Universal Jurisdiction). This principle is also related to the term and concept of Erga omnes, which refers to common rights owed to all, regardless of national or other boundaries.