Public and Humanitarian International Law - Essay Example

Not everyone believes this to be true. This paper shall now assess the following statement: public international law is nothing more than a reflection of what powerful states choose to do. It shall review the claim that international law is based on not what the international community wants, but what the powerful nations want. This thesis shall be evaluated in this discussion via theories and discussion by experts and scholars in international law. This paper is being undertaken in order to provide a comprehensive and academic discussion of the subject matter.

Discussion International laws are ideally implemented based on principles and mandates which are formulated by its member nations. These mandates are voted on and ratified by member states and later implemented to govern international transactions and relations. In the actual setting, these laws in relation to political processes may often be considered irreconcilable and conflicting with each other. For the most part, dominant states may not want to use the different processes available under international laws; they may sometimes consider turning to politics instead1.

However, the international systems seem to dissociate itself from power and domination. Based on the principle of sovereignty, the international laws are distancing itself from the more dominant applications of power and of political might. However since international laws always need power in order to enforce its policies, on its own, these laws seem to be powerless in most situations2. It is in unable to control power states based on its own standing, therefore it seems to depend on the application of the balance of power.

In other words, in instances “when there is neither community of interests nor balance of power, there is no international law”3. Consequently, international law sometimes appears as a beacon of equality where justice prevails and power plays are consigned to the realm of politics where the more cutthroat relations prevail. This difference in application finds its best expression in the designated roles of law and politics in the early 19th century in the era of the Concert of Europe. In its interaction with weaker countries, the Concert carried out its processes via political, not so much in the legal processes4.

This mutual exclusion is sometimes utilized to define the contemporary relations in international and the United States. The US, which is disinclined to ratify treaties and is more inclined to be relieved of international legal processes, often appears as a “lawless hegemon, however in spite of that, international law among the rest of states seems to flourish on its way to realizing the values of the international community”5. Moreover, the laws and political power seems to function in differing plains.

As a result, international law appears idealized and the realists and critical legal scholars have accepted the fact that the laws are shaped and dictated by power6. Many scholars have even accepted the fact that the history of international laws marks milestones of power dominance. This paper shall proceed to evaluate whether or not the power displays in the international realm impact on the application of international laws. The international processes of dominant states straddles two policies, that of instrumentalization and withdrawal.

The orientations of these two policies are different from each other as they move in two