ПРАВО НАРОДОВ (JUS GENTIUM) В ИДЕОЛОГИЧЕСКОЙ И ГЕОПОЛИТИЧЕСКОЙ ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИИ КАРЛА ШМИТТА

Abstract

Most of C. Schmitt’s scientific texts are considered “classics of the genre”, and the scientist himself took a strong position in modern political studies, political science, and philosophy. The relevance of Schmitt’s scientific heritage is beyond doubt though there might be certain logical, content and historical inaccuracies. Strange as it may seem, it is those very inaccuracies that often provide food for further effective development of modern scientific thought. The purpose of the paper in that regard is, on the one hand, to critically analyze some provisions in Schmitt’s teachings, and on the other, to try to motivate oneself and the reader (by means of the analysis performed) to find answers while solving questions modern civilization is facing today. Most likely, Schmitt himself would not protest against his theoretical heritage being revised, having once remarked that “every phrase contains an answer, every answer answers a question, and every question grows out of some situation”. The paper is devoted to Schmitt’s interpretation of the law of nations. The law of nations as a prototype of international law has been subjected to multiple interpretations (starting from the time of its origin in the bowels of Roman law and ending with the interpretations employed by the lawyers of the 20th century). The author opts for an interpretation of the law of nations suggested by Schmitt in relation to the conception of G. Grotius, the Dutch lawyer who laid the foundations of international law. The aim is to investigate the reasons why Schmitt rejected Grotius’ division of the law of nations into the law of war and the law of peace, ignoring specifically the law of peace as such. Schmitt’s theoretical research about wars and nomoses (historical periods of specific spatial realities) is also of great importance. The third nomos (and the last one within Schmitt’s classification) involves not only the redistribution of a large geographical space, but also its mandatory politicization with the need for political struggle and the conquest of foreign territories. The inevitability of antagonistic relations between land and sea civilizations (nomoses) demonstrated by Schmitt turned into an alliance of sea (USA, Great Britain) and land (USSR) nomoses during the Second World War, and the legal system built by Schmitt could exist only under the conditions of an emergency (military) situation and an ongoing war, which eventually led Germany to disaster. In conclusion, the author analyzes Schmitt’s teaching consequences for the political history of the 20th century, paying tribute to the ability of the talented philosopher to remain relevant and popular until now.