E.H. Carr, International Relations Theory, and the Societal Origins of International Legal Norms

Abstract

E.H. Carr, International Relations· Theory, and the Societal Origins of International Legal Norms Cecelia Lynch This article explores an important as peel of peace movements· impact on international relations. It focuses in particular on the anicula1ion and promotion of inlemational legal norins by Anglo-American peace movements in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Social forces, in 1he fonn of peace movements, have, since the post-Napoleonic period, attempled with great energy and consideriible success to influence noirns underpinning international law. Nonns promoted by these movements include constraints on stales' right IO wage war and the requirement that slates attempt lo resolve conflict' peacefully before using force, which over time have been embodied in trea1ies and agreemenls such as the Hague Conventions, the Covenant of the League of Nations, the 1928 Pact of Paris and the UN Charter. Additional nonns promoted by peace movements include the constitutive principles or universalism (lhe notion that all political actors should participate in decisions about peace, security, and the improvement of international life 1) and equality of status (the notion that they should do so on an equal basis, and that rights should be granted 10 and obligations binding· upon all) that provide the foundation for twentieth century global international organisa1ions such as the League or Na1ions and 1he United Nations. Social movements have made these auempls as part of a much Jess successful endeavour to promo1e Jaw as a means of ensuring international peace. The tenn social movemen1s, as used in 1his article,.denotes loose associations of actors who work for their goals (out of necessity or choice) al leas! in pan outside of 'traditional' poli1ical channels, and within the arena of 'civil society'. They are thus relatfrely tiutonomous from traditional political institutions, although individual movement members, being generally middle-class and frequently well-educated, often share ditect experience in such institutions (e.g., government, political parties, labour unions).~ h is almost always inaccurate to I would like 10 thank Audie Kloll, Friedrich Kratochwil, Michael Loriaux. Thomas Warnke and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful and astute comments. I. Whether these political entities and actors should be concep!ualized as states, indil-iduals. 'peoples' or 01her !ypes of transnational actors remained a maller of contention among movemenl groups, however. 2. This type or definition, i.e., one that focuses on movements' re/atil'e autonomy from traditional political institutions and their locus of action in civil society. has been current since at least the mid-1980s wi1h the advent of the 'European' or 'identity' school or social mov.ement research. See, for example, Claus Offe, 'New Social Movements: e Millennium: Journal of lntcmalional Studies, 1994. ISSN 0305-8298. Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 589-619