Taming Arbitration: States’ Men, Lawyers, and Peace Advocates from the Hague to the War

Abstract

At the end of the nineteenth century, the states’-system saw off a challenge from international lawyers and peace advocates who sought saw arbitration as a means to constrain raison d’état and state discretion over the decision to go to war. While there is no evidence that statesmen engaged in a vast conspiracy, the statements and actions of diplomats from all the great powers demonstrate a consistent pattern of opposition to arbitration, restricting its application prior to, at, and after the Hague Conferences. In so doing, they worked to create the appearance of meeting public demand for an alternative to war. It is no surprise, therefore, that arbitration was never a meaningful part of international relations and can hardly be blamed for the descent into war in 1914.