World opinion and the empire of circumstance

Abstract

John Vincent and his work embodied the concept that ideas and history are Siamese twins: not simply because his books were in part histories of ideas (he traced the origins of the conceptions of both non-intervention and human rights with meticulous skill'), but also because he saw ideas as potentially moving forces in history, and at the least as reflections of, or ways of, crystallizing the central preoccupations of an age. Ideas and 'events' are always in a relationship of dynamic interaction; indeed, to a degree, ideas constitute events. If the very first sentence of Vincent's major book on non-intervention says that'Intervention is a word used to describe an event, something which happens in international relations: it is not just an idea which crops up in speculation about them,' a few lines later he is adding:'The fact that the same word is used to describe [such] diverse phenomena turns the focus of attention from intervention as an event to intervention as a concept, in order to decide what it is that is common to each case.'2 Ultimately,Vincent was fascinated by the way in which ideas were coloured differently according to the historical contexts in which they cropped up, and he was sensitive to the dangers of anachronism. For these reasons I like to think thatJohnVincent would have been interested in the theme of this article, and of the lecture on which it is based: world opinion. Both are a tribute to his memory and provide me with a personal thread back to the many discussions and disputes we enjoyed from the time we