magnify
Home Articles posted by Joseph Weiler

In this Issue

Published on March 30, 2015        Author: 

This issue opens with the first entry under our new, annual rubric, The EJIL Foreword. Taking the ongoing debate concerning the United Nations’ role in the Haitian cholera tragedy as his starting point, Jan Klabbers presents a masterly tour d’horizon of the intellectual origins, current state, and future prospects of the law of international organizations. In the process, he reconstructs – and exposes the blind spots and biases – of a functionalist theory that he identifies as specific to and underlying that law.

In the next article in the issue, Janina Dill presents a novel framework for understanding the different set of demands made on states in war. Identifying ‘three logics of waging war’ – associated respectively with international humanitarian law, military strategy, and an individual rights-based morality – she concludes that the three cannot be reconciled, presenting war-making states with an irresolvable ‘trilemma’. On a related topic, but adopting a very different approach, Amanda Alexander presents a new and revisionist history of international humanitarian law, locating its origins in the work of a particular set of actors from the 1970s onwards. Bart Smit Duijzentkunst and Sophia Dawkins, draw from relational contract theory to construct an innovative model of arbitration in peace processes, and demonstrate the value of that theory and model through a set of carefully presented case studies. And Ulf Linderfalk’s short article on the perennially relevant topic of treaty interpretation adduces a series of well-chosen examples to elucidate the relationship between the aims and means of interpretation.

In Roaming Charges, the ‘Moment of Dignity’ is  a photograph that celebrates the small traditions we risk losing in our fast-moving world. The photographer is Martin Lestra, PhD researcher at the European University Institute. We remind our readers that submissions to Roaming Charges are welcome.

The articles section of this issue is rounded out by the return of two of our regular rubrics, EJIL: Debate! and Critical Review of International Jurisprudence, both addressing topics relating to the European Court of Human Rights. Under the first, we present Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez’s somewhat provocative article on the issue of gender balance within the Court, assessing the politics of the appointment process through a detailed analysis of the self-presentation by the 120 or so women who have applied for positions on the Court. We publish Replies by Françoise Tulkens and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, both of whom have direct, personal experience of that process. Finally, Paolo Lobba surveys the development of the Court’s jurisprudence on Holocaust denial, which he argues has important implications for ‘denialism’ in relation to other core international crimes.
The Last Page, offering nourishment for the soul as well as the mind, presents a poem by Dimitri Van den Meerssche entitled ‘Calling Themis’.

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL, EJIL Analysis
 

Vital Statistics

Published on March 30, 2015        Author: 

Here are our ‘vital stats’ for 2014. Each year we track trends in the submission and publication of unsolicited manuscripts according to criteria of gender, place of submission and language. Note that there are no special requirements for authors wishing to submit to EJIL (you don’t have to hold a PhD or have a tenured position or write with impeccable Oxford English) nor is there any editorial affirmative action in selecting manuscripts for publication. Our double-blind review process guards against that. So the statistics we present speak plainly about the submissions we receive and the manuscripts accepted for publication.

Having seen a rise in the percentage of manuscripts submitted and published by women authors in the previous two years, the figures stabilized in 2014 at 35 per cent both for submissions and accepted articles. The figure was 28 per cent for published articles (recall that published articles largely reflect submissions of the previous year). For now I regard this as a blip – I doubt it signals a trend.

We divide the world into four regions for our statistical purposes: the European Union, the Council of Europe countries outside the EU, the US and Canada, and the rest of the world. This statistic might seem a little misleading as it indicates the place of submission – normally the institution at which authors work or study, rather than their actual nationality – but overall we believe it conveys a fairly reliable picture of our authors. Of the total number of manuscripts submitted in 2014, 43 per cent came from the EU, 8 per cent from CoE countries, 25 per cent from the US and Canada and 24 per cent from the rest of the world; very similar figures to those of the previous year. For accepted and published articles, the EU took a slightly larger share of the cake, with 58 and 59 per cent of the total, respectively, whilst CoE countries claimed 5 per cent of accepted articles and a larger 15 per cent of those published. For the US and Canada, the figures were 16 per cent for accepted articles and 20 per cent for those published, whereas the rest of the world took 21 per cent of accepted articles and only 6 per cent of published articles. The 2015 ‘published’ figures will reflect the higher rate of acceptances from the rest of the world in 2014.  Read the rest of this entry…

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL, EJIL Analysis
 

ICON·S Conference; EJIL on your iPad!!!

Published on March 28, 2015        Author: 

ICON·S Conference  

The second conference of the International Society of Public Law (ICON·S), around the theme of ‘Public Law in an Uncertain World’, will be held in New York, at the New York University School of Law, on 1 – 3 July, 2015. The Call for Papers and Panels is open until 10 April 2015 and more information is available on the ICON·S website.

EJIL on your iPad!!!

We have ‘gambled’ and invested considerable resources, human and material, in developing a tablet version of EJIL. We believe a tablet version represents a perfect adaptation of one of our most important identity markers to the digital age and current reading habits.

The identity marker has two facets. The first is our huge commitment to a Journal which is not only edited but ‘curated’. For each issue we pay attention not only to the individual articles but to the ensemble. We try to make, in each and every issue, the whole greater than the sum of the parts, with careful, even loving, attention given to the construction of an interesting, rich and satisfying whole. Not just something of interest to different tastes and constituencies, but a more holistic concept of what a good journal issue should be and feel like. I have habitually extolled (and cajoled) our readers to actually pick up the hard copy of EJIL to enjoy the ‘book feel’ of each issue.

The second facet is our long-standing commitment to the aesthetics of publication. It is based on the premise that beauty is an integral part of the world of the mind. A well-written article, for example, has a beauty that stands independently of the content as well as enhancing such. We all spend a huge amount of time and effort on our research and writing, and EJIL believes that the result deserves a presentation that does justice to such effort. A beautiful painting deserves a beautiful frame. If you look at the paper version of EJIL you cannot fail to notice this commitment reflected in seemingly trivial details such as the quality of paper and print. OUP has been our wonderful partner in crime in trying to achieve this.

We are, however, aware that for many the paper version is at best a (beautiful) doorstop. Hence the tablet version of EJIL – capturing both the holistic and ‘wholistic’ sense of each issue as well as its aesthetic qualities.

A tablet version is quite different to ‘going online’. The entire issue downloads onto your tablet. You can then browse and read at leisure away from your desk. If you are like me, it is likely to be on some long flight. You can leaf through the issue or click a title in the ToC and skip to it.

To be clear, the tablet version will not replace the online access that subscribers are entitled to on the OUP platform or the free access to the EJIL archives (except for the current year) on the www.ejil.org site. Rather, it will offer a new and different reading dimension.

We gambled that the tablet version will be a huge success with many of our existing subscribers and will encourage many other readers to become individual subscribers.  Make no mistake: this initiative is not driven in any way by economic considerations. The individual subscription to EJIL is among the lowest in the field, if not the lowest, and has been kept constant for years. It is practically an at-cost price. You will also note that the difference between the individual subscription rate and the cost of membership in the European Society of International Law (ESIL) is negligible. All members of the Society are offered a subscription to EJIL. So my recommendation would be to use this occasion to become a member of ESIL and enjoy all membership benefits as well as a subscription to EJIL, including access to the new tablet version!

The app will launch with this issue of the Journal. In a first phase it will be available only for Apple devices. An Android version will follow shortly.  Access to content through the app will be limited to individual subscribers and ESIL members. Subscribers should visit www.exacteditions.com/print/ejil and enter their OUP customer ID number for authentication, then simply follow the links from that page to install the app to their device. New subscribers will receive full instructions from OUP.

For those attending the ASIL meeting in April, visit the OUP stand. There will be free access to the EJIL app in the vicinity.

 Finally, although we tested a beta version for several months there are bound to be some teething problems (please be patient) and ways to improve the tablet version. Do not hesitate to write to us.

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL, EJIL Analysis
 

The EJIL Annual Foreword

Published on March 27, 2015        Author: 

Starting with the present issue, we will be publishing The EJIL Foreword in the first issue of each year.

The idea, and the title, are unashamedly ‘borrowed’ (we did not ask them) from the famous Harvard Law Review Foreword. We will be inviting each year a ‘distinguished’ scholar in the field – distinguished not simply by an illustrious career, but also by having, we believe, something interesting to say – to present a ‘state of the field’ type article, permitting on an annual basis a regular ‘deep breath’ reflection on international law with a horizontal appeal to many readers.

A higher word limit, in the range of 40,000 words, will permit, we trust and hope, a more extensive analysis, synthesis, conceptualization, or systemic theorization than is usually possible in an EJIL article. Considerable licence will be given to each author to define the topic of his or her Foreword, but in principle it will be expected to:

  • define an original vision of the field, and/or
  • reflect on the state of the discipline as a whole (or a particularly pressing challenge facing it)

in light of recent events and developments in practice.

The inaugural Foreword, by Jan Klabbers, published in this issue captures, in its ambition, breadth and depth, precisely the type of piece we have in mind. We also invite readers to watch the extensive EJIL Live! conversation with Professor Klabbers concerning his Foreword.

The celebrated Hague General Courses serve in some ways a similar function to The EJIL Foreword, but both the format and size of a General Course of International Law are quite different.  Our own ambition and hope is that the Foreword will establish itself in its own way as a kind of ‘cousin’ of the General Course, an important ‘event’ on the IL intellectual calendar, and that over time the accumulation of EJIL Forewords will constitute a repository of profound reflection on international law itself and of self-reflection on the academic discipline of international law.

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 

European Hypocrisy: TTIP and ISDS

Published on January 21, 2015        Author: 

I

For some, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in and of itself has become in many European (and American) circles, the enemy: another manifestation of unchecked globalization, the march of Capital trumping social, environmental and other  rights, an unhealthy embrace of the Americans from whose clutches we have painfully managed to extricate ourselves, et cetera. Yes, there is some sarcasm or irony in the above, but visit the blogs and you will see where it comes from. My sarcasm should not be taken as a dismissal of all or any of these concerns. TTIP is far from Snow White. The concerns are not entirely fanciful. It is the final objective I oppose: a no-holds-barred attack on TTIP with the objective of tanking the whole agreement. If this is your view, do not waste your time here and skip to another item.

A wholesale defeat of TTIP, if achieved, will, I believe, be a big time Pyrrhic victory ̶ a hugely missed opportunity for the polities and the peoples of these polities.

I support the TTIP for two obvious and banal reasons. First, there is every reason to believe that on aggregate it will contribute significantly to an increase in welfare in both polities, enhance growth, contribute to stability and constitute another tool, in an embarrassingly empty toolkit, to combat future transatlantic-generated economic shocks. A large and often unspoken asset of TTIP rests not with the content of the various substantive disciplines but in establishing a culture of joint conversation, regulation and management. It will counter the litigious and confrontational culture of the WTO, where the EU and the USA find themselves typically as rivals and antagonists. Constructivist theory actually has something to say here as do the insights of Global Administrative Law scholarship. Read the rest of this entry…

 
Tags:

Roll of Honour and Masthead Changes

Published on January 20, 2015        Author: 

Roll of Honour

EJIL relies on the good will of colleagues in the international law community who generously devote their time and energy to act as peer reviewers for the large number of submissions we receive. Without their efforts our Journal would not be able to maintain the excellent standards to which we strive. A lion’s share of the burden is borne by members of our Boards, but of course we also turn to many colleagues in the broader community. We thank the following colleagues for their contribution to EJIL’s peer review process in 2014:

Tilmann Altwicker, Dia Anagnostou, Stelios Andreadakis, Asli Bâli, Arnulf Becker Lorca, Catherine Brölmann, Gian Luca Burci, Damian Chalmers, Cai Congyan, Kristina Daugirdas, Richard Gardiner, Lech Garlicki, Matthias Goldmann, Hans Morten Haugen, Laurence Helfer, Ian Johnstone, Alexandra Kemmerer, Jan Komárek, Dino Kritsiotis, Jürgen Kurtz, Ulf Linderfalk, David Malone, Petros Mavroidis, Frédéric Mégret, Carrie Menkel-Meadow, Joanna Mossop, Jens Ohlin, Jacqueline Peel, Cecily Rose, Arie Rosen, Nicole Roughan, Martin Scheinin, Iain Scobbie, Ingo Venzke, Steven Wheatley, Nigel White.

Masthead Changes

The growth and development of any organization, even a journal, depends on the strength of its foundations. In the case of EJIL, those foundations are represented by its Board of Editors and its Scientific Advisory Board. To maintain their strength, the EJIL Boards benefit from change and renewal. Thus, I would like to sincerely thank Anne Peters, who has stepped down from the Board of Editors, for her dedicated commitment and service to the Journal. Anne has now assumed a leadership role in the newly established Journal of the History of International Law. We wish the new journal (and Anne) every success. Thanks also go to Francesco Francioni and Hélène Ruiz Fabri who have come to the end of their term on the Board of Editors, but will continue their valuable contribution to the Journal in the Scientific Advisory Board. Dapo Akande, Anthea Roberts and the newly-elected ESIL President, André Nollkaemper, have joined the Board of Editors. Finally, we welcome Jean d’Aspremont, Jan Klabbers, Sarah Nouwen and Anne van Aaken to the Scientific Advisory Board.

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 

EJIL Volume 25:4–In This Issue

Published on January 20, 2015        Author: 

This issue opens with a short, reflective article by Jochen von Bernstorff on the proper role of international legal scholarship. Recapitulating themes and concerns sounded in other articles published earlier in this volume – see, especially, Anne Orford’s ‘Keynote’ and the article by Tilmann Altwicker and Oliver Diggelmann, both in issue 2 – von Bernstorff points to the problematic legacies of positivist 19th-century legal thought and argues that scholarship has the potential to act as a ‘cooling medium’ for international law and politics. In the next article in the issue, Kristina Daugirdas makes a not-dissimilar case for the importance of the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. Taking the 2010 cholera outbreak in Haiti as a case study, Daugirdas argues that the Articles may turn out to provide a useful focal point for ‘transnational discourse’ among states and non-state actors about the compliance of international organizations with international law, thereby ultimately accruing to their legitimacy and effectiveness.

Our third article, by Richard Bellamy, continues with the theme of the legitimacy of international organizations. Bellamy takes on political constitutionalist objections that international human rights courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, lack democratic legitimacy. Rather than reject the premises of those objections he shows how an argument consistent with those premises may be constructed in favour of the European Court of Human Rights. The fourth article in this issue also relates political philosophy to international law. In his article, Oisin Suttle bridges the gap between global justice theory and international economic law, developing a typology of international coercion that promises to illuminate a variety of problems and positions in the regulation of international trade. Look out for the EJIL: Live! interview with Oisin Suttle in which we discuss some of the issues raised by this stimulating article.

Under our regular EJIL: Debate! rubric, Lorand Bartels brings us back to the legal obligations of international organizations. Bartels’ article considers the human rights obligations imposed on the European Union under EU law, in particular in relation to the extraterritorial effects of EU policy measures; and Enzo Cannizzaro provides a thoughtful Reply. The debate will continue on EJIL: Talk! with a Rejoinder by Lorand Bartels to Enzo Cannizzaro. Readers are invited to join the discussion there.

Read the rest of this entry…

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off

Christmas Reading? Christmas Gifts? Some Suggestions from the Editor-in-Chief

Published on December 19, 2014        Author: 

The following is not a ’10 Best Books Published in 2014’. Looking back at the books (excluding novels) I read (and in some cases re-read) this year I have picked those which created that ‘everyone should read this book’ urge that we all experience from time to time. The selection is of course entirely subjective, but rigorous in one sense: knowing how precious reading time is, involving serious opportunity costs, I put on the list only those titles where I felt that I would not run the risk that someone would write to me and say: you wasted my time.

The order of books on the list is arbitrary.

Moshe Halbertal, Maimonides: Life and Thought, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013

Of Maimonides it has been said endlessly that from [the great Biblical] Moses to Moses [Maimonides] no one has arisen as Moses. (Trust me, it sounds a lot better in pithy Hebrew – Momoshe ad Moshe Lo Kam KeMoshe). A son of Cordoba (1138) he spent the central part of his life in Cairo where he died in 1204 and was then buried in Tiberius. Renaissance Man (long before the Renaissance) he was and remains one of the greatest Jewish teachers, scholars, legal decisors, philosophers (in the Aristotelian tradition) and physicians. His codification of Jewish Law has remained normative till this day and his Guide to the Perplexed is part of the canon of medieval philosophy and is hugely rewarding to anyone today (all too few, alas) interested in virtue theory. The story of his life, an exile from Caliphate Andalusia and ending as physician to the Crown of Egypt, is not only riveting but offers a window to a world of, inter alia, Islamic glory, which is not often known beyond a small circle of scholars.  Read the rest of this entry…

 

Sleepwalking Again: The End of the Pax Americana 1914-2014, Part III

Published on November 10, 2014        Author: 

This is Part III of the Keynote speech delivered at ESIL’s 10th Anniversary Conference, held in Vienna, 4-6 September 2014. Parts I and II were published last week. The full version will be published in EJIL in a subsequent issue.

It is time to cry “Wolf” – since Europe finds itself with its basic, most fundamental, if often unstated, assumptions of security evaporating. Of course it would be fanciful, undesirable and unnecessary to imagine that the Pax Americana could be replaced by some form of Pax Europea. Unnecessary because the USA is not disappearing. But the evident  weakening of its constraining and restraining power — the Authoritativeness Deficit — has to be made somehow whole.

So what role for Europe? Surely it does not mean and should not mean that Europe would simply fill in the American gaps and play a slightly or significantly more sonorous second fiddle to the USA by, for example, making a heftier contribution to NATO. It means, in the first place, that Europe has seriously to reassess its own self understanding of its global responsibilities. Though this might seem a platitudinous and hence easy to achieve step, it is arguably the most difficult and crucial if, indeed, it is not to remain platitudinous and would represent a veritable shift in political consciousness.  In the second place it has seriously to upgrade its autonomous Global Authoritativeness, its own constraining and restraining power and from that, and in that, position interact with the USA and the rest of the world.  Not a superpower, but an indispensable power. It is a tall order but  setting for a moment politics aside, not an impossible one, since the actual toolkit does not need to be created ex nihili.

Sure, militarily, Europe’s credibility is risible, and has been so for long. Think Bosnia and Kosovo, think even Libya. But it is in the paradoxical position that militarily, the European whole is smaller than the sum of the parts. This well known paradox, the result of national interests, jealousies, pride, inertia not to say pettiness, is startling, but it is also a silver lining since there is a huge amount of already existing capacity simply terribly badly utlized. Europe’s economic clout, as a trading bloc, is second to none, greater than most and potentially a formidable tool of foreign policy and security, glimmers of which could be witnessed as Europe finally began to get its act together in the Ukraine crisis, but therein lies the rub – its ability to get its act together. Politically, too, one does not start from zero. United (when it is) in its rich diversity offers a veritable European foreign policy an interesting, even unique potential of foreign action utilizing historical ties and connections of its various Member States as points of entry, bridge and alliance building towards friend and foe alike and the ability to converse with nuance and in multiple political idioms. Morally, both nationally and in the form of the European Union Europe has effectively shed its colonial baggage and it does not carry nearly the weight of suspicion with which US foreign policy is encumbered. Effectively melded together and used with the kind of adroitness which some of the individual Member States are renowned for, simply underscores the potential of existing capacities even before any serious upgrading is to take place. One is not starting from Zero. Read the rest of this entry…

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL, European Union
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off

Sleepwalking Again: The End of the Pax Americana 1914-2014, Part II

Published on November 6, 2014        Author: 

This is Part II of an excerpt from the Keynote speech delivered at ESIL’s 10th Anniversary Conference, held in Vienna, 4-6 September 2014.  Part I was published yesterday. The full version will be published in EJIL in a subsequent issue.

Note: This post has been updated to reflect a later version of the text.

Though one could call into question the wisdom or propriety of a whole variety of American actions of the past century, there was a justified sense that America was a guarantor of a kind of stability. In the most primitive sense this was the Pax Americana.

No more. There are, of course, no sharp temporal lines – an assassination in Sarajevo was a signpost, not a real cause. Still, 2014 is in contention to be judged by history as the watershed period, the culmination of a structural process signaling the demise of the Pax Americana.

We might think that we have been here before: Periods of American economic crisis, isolationism and lack of nerve have come and gone during the last hundred years. But my argument is that the current circumstance is different, at least in two unprecedented (if connected) ways.

First, we are actually not experiencing today American Isolationism and withdrawal, quite the contrary. In some respects we are witnessing heightened American engagement: Resetting relations with Russia, the Turn to Asia, frenetic efforts in the Israel-Palestinian context, direct and indirect activity surrounding events in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab Spring, the pre withdrawal Surge in Iraq and ongoing commitment in Afghanistan and now with ISIS, the determined cultivation of Turkey, vocal diplomacy as regards sanctions against the Ukraine, the TTIP as a strategic asset, constructive and cooperative American involvement in the Trade Facilitation Agreement and a renewed interest in Africa to mention but some aspects of contemporary US foreign engagement.

What is different is the cumulative impression of loss of American constraining power and influence. There is a growing discrepancy between engagement and results. Just go down list: Relations with Russia are at Cold War levels without the containment effect; Chinese bellicose posture vis-à-vis  Japan and in the South China Sea are at a level one would not have imagined a mere decade ago; the US clamorous humiliations (no other word is strong enough) in reigniting the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process and having any impact whatsoever on the bloody Gaza conflagrations; relations with Egypt far more complex than ever before; the collapse in Libya and general American impotence to predict or shape the post Spring events; Iraq in disarray with America scurrying to seek alliances with yesteryear’s enemies in the face of the true Syrian debacle (and a no-one-dare-to-say-what-just-about-everyone-is-thinking: the good-old-days-of-the-secular-Saddam-regime); the American would-be and well deserved dividend in Afghanistan all but written off; a Turkey in which America has lost even the semblance of an ally; the inability of the US to have a united front with the EU on sanctions – it took the Malaysia airline catastrophe to bring Europe around, not American pressure; the TTIP in the doldrums its requiem quietly being composed; the collapse (temporary one hopes) of the Bali Trade Facilitation Agreement (itself a fig leaf to the failed Doha) at the hands of India, American pressure and diplomacy notwithstanding; and America in Africa? How do you spell that in Chinese? Read the rest of this entry…

Filed under: Editorials, EJIL