International Order Research Articles

A mid-level perspective on the ethics of immigration policies

ABSTRACT This paper considers various aspects of Joseph Carens’s argument in The Ethics of Immigration. It discusses, first, his analogy between internal and international free movement. I argue that it does not sufficiently take into account the different conditions for self-government of municipalities and provinces nested within independent states and those of states within the international political system. Second, the paper argues for expanding international free movement as a citizenship right (through international agreements, regional unions and acceptance of multiple citizenship), whereas the claims of economic migrants on grounds of global distributive justice should instead be addressed through regular migration that is subject to immigration control. The common denominator of these policies is a strategy of ‘internalizing’ claims to territorial admission in democracies so that they can also be perceived as promoting a liberal conception of the common good. Third, a similar approach can also be applied to the liberal international order. Here, I take issue with Carens’s analogy between citizenship in the global order and membership in feudal estates and propose instead to build on egalitarian, pluralistic and cooperative norms that are already enshrined in international law when promoting progressive reforms in the international arena. The paper concludes with a discussion of Carens’s distinction between real-world and ideal-world presuppositions. As an alternative to Carens’s ‘shifting presuppositions’ strategy, I suggest that action-guiding normative approaches should position themselves at a mid-level where they promote transformations of liberal democracies and the international order towards more open borders.

Russia’s expulsion: The Council of Europe as the guardian of European imperialism

Abstract On 16 March 2022, Russia became the first state to be expelled from the Council of Europe (CoE). The reshaping of power dynamics between international law actors is providing a favourable space to international organizations to use membership as a strategic tool. In order to understand under what circumstances the CoE decides to end membership, the article elucidates the substantive and symbolic grounds of Russia’s expulsion. Substantive grounds are defined as non-compliance with the membership criteria of the CoE and its founding principles as regulated in Article 3 of its Statute. Symbolic grounds are what motivates the CoE in its positioning within the international legal order as indicated in the preamble of its Statute. The analysis of the substantive grounds will reveal that the violation of the CoE Statute and the prohibition on the use of force because of the invasion of Ukraine are not enough to explain Russia’s expulsion. This article argues that Russia’s expulsion relies on symbolic grounds that allowed the CoE to preserve its position as the guardian of European imperialism. The clash of the two actors’ irreconcilable imperial policies proved for the CoE that Russia would no longer be at the receiving end of its demands. The Ukraine invasion signals a breaking point, escalating the inter-imperial rivalry to a level where the CoE believes Russia will no longer submit itself to the European international legal order as shaped by the Western European founders of the Organization.

International Cooperation In The Field Of Internal Affairs Personnel In Uzbekistan

The legal conditions for international cooperation between States are determined by the fact that the international legal order is based on the rule of law and a high level of trust in the system of interstate relations, and the security of the state is interconnected with the security of the entire world community. The main purpose of the article is to prepare law enforcement officers and analyze their activities within the framework of international cooperation. The article will also discuss the benefits of cooperation with international organizations and the results of future strategies in this direction. The study was illuminated on the basis of scientific principles such as historicism, logicism and scientific methods such as inductive and deductive, analysis and synthesis, as well as modern approaches, and its scientific results were summed up according to the principle of unity of theory and practice

He Ideological Legacy of Ho Chi Minh in Contemporary International Legal Policy of Vietnam

The role of President Ho Chi Minh in the history of Vietnam cannot be overestimated. His humanistic ideology permeates all spheres of modern life of Vietnamese society, including exerting a significant influence on the foreign policy of the state and its approaches to the norms and institutions of the international legal order. Based on the legacy of the political, legal and social philosophical views of Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam in its modern international legal policy pays significant attention to participation in fundamental treaties in the field of international humanitarian law and human rights, expands its participation in international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, improves its practice of resolving international economic and territorial disputes, confirming its commitment to the Rule of Law in international relations. Representatives of Vietnamese science of international law take an unprecedented part in the progressive development of international law in the International Law Commission. The opening of the Permanent Court of Arbitration office in Hanoi demonstrates recognition of Vietnam's efforts to maintain the international legal order and provides new opportunities for training highly qualified personnel capable of competitively but lawfully ensuring the national interests of the state in international relations. The task of building a fair and pluralistic international world, which President Ho Chi Minh dreamed of, is in the reliable hands of his modern Vietnamese followers - international lawyers and diplomats.

On consular internationalism

Abstract This article focuses international legal scholars’ attention on consular relations, consular work, and related international law. It does so for two main reasons. First, as scholars of diplomatic history and international relations have observed, consular work is of growing significance in global affairs. Second, there are largely unrealized possibilities for thinking about international law, and grappling afresh with its dilemmas, through a consular optic. International law conducted through consular offices and officials advances views of the international legal plane, its key actors, and relations among them, that are distinguishable from those advanced by diplomacy and international law as traditionally conceived. This article theorizes this distinctive logic as consular internationalism. Its argument is that consular internationalism is a richer resource for thought and practice in international law than commonly acknowledged. It is especially relevant, this article aims to show, for analyzing historical and contemporary entanglements of imperial and commercial power, grappling with the role of lay people and unofficial communities in shaping international legal order, and, potentially, supporting anti-hierarchical struggles.

Global South and western divergence on Russia's war in Ukraine: implications for world order

Abstract Since February 2022, there has been much commentary about the divergence between responses of the global South and western perspectives in relation to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There has been less discussion about this contrast representing a democratic divide. Yet the ‘non-aligned’ stance adopted by some of the world's largest democracies throws into question the framing of the war as a struggle between democracy and autocracy, as favoured by former United States President Joe Biden. This article highlights both differences and affinities in the international behaviour of democracies which are obscured in generalizations about a North/South dichotomy. Instead, it assesses Ikenberry's categorization of the competition to shape world order as an interaction between ‘Three Worlds’ (the global West, East and South). The article also uses Johnston's concept of international order as ‘a world of multiple orders in different domains … rather than a single, U.S.-dominated liberal order’. Finally, it draws on Moravcsik's ‘new liberalism’ regarding the primacy of interacting state preferences in international relations. The article argues that the case of the Ukraine conflict exemplifies how democracies converge and/or diverge in responding to issues in different domains of world order(s), thereby challenging the notion of a systemic North/South dichotomy in approaches to a purported liberal international order.

«Man is Not a Wolf to Man, but a Human». On the Coexistence of Peoples in Another International Order. Francisco de Vitoria and the School of Salamanca

In the 16th century, the Spanish University of Salamanca witnessed one of the most important intellectual events in European history, driven by the historical changes which, in turn, prompted the first wave of globalization that connected the world. It was the creation of the so-called School of Salamanca, a broad movement of philosophers, theologians, jurists, travelers and missionaries who reflected on the most pressing issues of the time: coexistence between different peoples, freedom, slavery, the right to property, just war and many others. Nowadays the globalization is different. In the 16th century, Spain was a hegemon, and the defense of the Christian faith and its expansion was the main rationale behind territorial expansion. Today, the US is the hegemon of the Western world: it has imposed a unipolar order that legitimizes conflicts and clashes of greater or lesser intensity across the planet, supposedly in defense, not of the Christian faith, but of democracy and human rights. Therefore, it is important to explore some of the fundamental ideas of Francisco de Vitoria, founder of the School of Salamanca. He developed a theory on humanity and relations between nations based on his understanding of the qualities that every human being possesses by nature, which clashes with the currently dominant view of international relations, rooted in the Anglo-Saxon and Protestant perception of human nature, as opposed to the Hispanic and Catholic view. Hence, despite the distance that separates us from the world of Francisco de Vitoria and his theories, perhaps we should revisit the lessons of the University of Salamanca of the 16th century, which we seem to have forgotten.

The crisis of the conservative international order

Abstract The crisis of the liberal international order (LIO) is the dominant narrative of our time. It pervades scholarship, journalism and policy discussion, influencing the ways we see contemporary global tensions, future possibilities and political choices. This article argues that the current crisis is not simply a crisis of the LIO, but of the CIO—the conservative international order. The postwar order was not constructed by liberals alone. It was also built by conservative governments, politicians and intellectuals who were crucial parts of the domestic and international accommodations and alliances underpinning the postwar order. Today's crisis is to a large degree the result of the implosion that has transformed conservatism from a supporter of the LIO to one of its most powerful opponents. While this article focuses on the United States, the implications of the crisis of the CIO extend beyond America and require a fundamental rethinking of the conventional International Relations view of liberalism and the development of the LIO. The influence of the anti-liberal forces in American conservatism is supported by their transnational connections, allowing for powerful alliances that undermine mainstream conservatism and its historical support for the LIO. The crisis of the CIO, in short, is global.

Party contestation of foreign policy in the new global (dis)order: introduction

The Liberal International Order (LIO) faces challenges both from authoritarian powers and within multi-party democracies from radical and populist parties. Yet while the dual – internal and external – nature of the challenges to the LIO is obvious, it is still unclear how these two dimensions interact. This special issue explores this link, with particular reference to reactions to the Russia-Ukraine war. This introduction analyses linkages between polarizing trends in multi-party democracies and growing contestation of the international order; explains why the Russia-Ukraine war provides a lens to analyse the domestic contestation of the international order; and shows how this contestation is shaped by combinations of national culture, party systems, and geopolitical considerations. We find contestation of LIO is near-ubiquitous in democracies. While on the surface Russia’s invasion galvanised the ‘global West’, this crisis has added to democracies’ struggles with their own identities and debates about the kind of world order they want to see.

Updated Theoretical View on the Principle of the Most Favored Nation in the Modern International Law Order

INTRODUCTION. The principle of most favored nation (MFN) has long been used as an international legal instrument for regulating international trade between States in relation to customs duty rates. The main feature of the principle lies in the role that a third State plays in a bilateral legal relationship: participants (subjects) of a legal relationship are required to automatically provide the partner State (the authorized party) with any benefit granted to any third state, for example, a low rate of customs duty on imported goods or commodities. And, on the contrary, has the right to demand and receive such a privilege from the obligated party. The provision or receipt of a reduced rate for goods from the partner state is formalized and carried out by an act or acts of internal law (customs tariff, customs code, etc.), and this introduces a change in the internal customs regime of the interacting states. The principle of the most favored nation between two States is enforced and applies if the partner States receive benefits for goods in the partner State under the same most-favored-nation regime in comparison with the benefits granted to a third State for similar goods. The need to compare, contrast and equalize internal legal regimes in a coordinated sphere of relations at the most favorable level is an essential feature of the MFN principle, the main specific method of regulation. Over the past centuries, the MFN principle has come a long way in its formation and development, and today a new look at it is needed.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study of this topic and the solution of the task was carried out on the basis of a wide range of materials from the practice of using the MFN principle and its interpretation, the theoretical sharpening of many aspects, and the use of methodological tools traditional for the humanities (law) sciences.THE RESEARCH RESULTS. During the development of the topic, the history of the formation and development of MFN principle, its significance for the international law order and the prospects for its use as a norm of international law, as a principle and method of regulation appear in a slightly new light.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Despite the extensive scientific literature on MFN principle, there are still many unresolved, contradictory opinions and positions about its nature and essence, its normative force and effectiveness, its impact on interstate relations and its place in the global legal system. MFN principle appears today not only as a norm and principle of international law, but also as a principle-institutio, as a method (mechanism) of regulation. At the same time, the scope of its application is expanding, and the regulatory method embedded in it allows for the use of MFN in other potentially suitable areas. MFN principle is turning into an unit of interbranch law formation. In the international trading system and the international trade law order, MFN principle until recently possessed cogent properties, merging into a kind of trinity with the principle of national treatment and the principle of non-discrimination. With the modern transformation of the international system and the world order, MFN principle, as a universal, global principle, is reproduced at the regional and interregional levels, undergoing fragmentation characteristic of international law as a whole. At the same time, MFN principle has become and remains an integral part of the internal content of many fundamental principles of international law, as well as part of the generalizing principle of peaceful coexistence of States and civilizations.

The ‘Global Ireland’ Policy platform, Small Island Developing States and the geopolitics of an interstitial Ireland

Through its Global Ireland strategy, the Government of Ireland is projecting an ambitious foreign policy platform into the global commons. A range of policy modules have been developed and are being deployed discursively in specific targeted markets. It is an ambitious programme, for a small country. Common narratives of Ireland and Irish identity are being projected fuzzily, to best effect, in different regions. Commonly held policy narratives include i) Ireland as a networked member of the international economic order, ii) Ireland as a European Union member of long standing, iii) Ireland as an edge-island, iv) Ireland as an emigrant sending state with a widely distributed diaspora. Here, I find that Ireland successfully deploys these sometimes contradictory narratives from a deliberately interstitial foundation in space. The nexus of connection and separation is creatively deployed in these Irish policies and the Government of Ireland is seen to be performing a powerful political geography as a result.

A Theory of Annexation

Abstract Acquisition of territory by force, once permitted, is strictly forbidden today. However, this normative shift has not led to a reconceptualization of annexation, which is still understood as the extension of sovereignty through formal state acts. Maintaining the requirement of formal state acts, we argue, undermines the norm and is further analytically flawed and generates a rule-of-law problem: it fails to capture instances of undeclared annexation, and incentivises states to avoid formal proclamations of annexation to evade legal consequences. This article therefore proposes a new theory of annexation. Drawing on theories of bureaucracy and administration, we suggest three qualifications for annexation: the normative organising framework with which the state manages the territory reflects a perception of the territory as part of its own; the organisational structure of control assimilates the management of the territory into the bureaucratic machinery of the state; and the symbolic performance of power erases symbolic differences between the territory and the annexing state. This reconceptualisation of annexation may support the goal of the contemporary international legal order to suppress aggressive use of force and ensure the self-determination of peoples.

Reflections on complexity, nuclear ordering and disordering over time

Intensive development of a rule-based international nuclear order, with its multiple treaties and agreements, was crowded into a thirty-year period from the early-1960 to mid-1990. A tendency towards disorder has predominated since then, leading to today’s anxiety that nuclear affairs are becoming ‘beyond ordering’. The article examines the historical experience of ordering and disordering through the lens of complexity, and considers the parts that the nuclear field’s extraordinary and ever shifting technological, politico-military, politico-economic and moral complexities—and contentions—have played in affecting outcomes. Emphasis is placed on the concerted ‘political organisation of complexity’ or its absence, as practised by the US and USSR/Russia (increasingly joined by China), the dominant nuclear powers. They have been the primary creators, guardians and disruptors of the nuclear order. The article ends with a comment, looking to the long run, on Norbert Elias’s ‘end of the road?’ for hegemonic war or human survival in the nuclear age.

BRICS Expansion and the Quest for a Multipolar World: Prospects and Challenges of Ethiopia’s Inclusion

The rise of BRICS forum as a platform that is attempting to change the international economic and political order marked a turning point in the history and development of contemporary international relations. Africa is mostly peripheral in the political and economic global decision making. This paper seeks to explore how Eastern Africa, with a focus on Ethiopia’s entry into BRICS as a full member of the forum, can navigate the evolving multipolar world order in the sense of prospects and challenges. Ethiopia is a potential powerhouse and a key player in the Eastern African sub region due to its massive population and economic opportunities. The paper adopts the neo-Gramscian theoretical framework, which is a critical theory that analyzed and interrogate the origin, nature and development of historical structures as well as it is a counter hegemonic theory. Findings of the paper shows that despite the fact Ethiopia’s inclusion as a full member of BRICS strengthened its bargaining power, being the least economy in the forum limits its influence. The study contributes to the discourse on South-South cooperation and Africa’s evolving role in global governance.

VOTING BY BRAZIL, ISRAEL, AND THAILAND IN UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS ON THE WAR IN UKRAINE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

The study examines the fluctuating voting behavior of states in the United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the war in Ukraine. Following the Eleventh Emergency Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on February 28, 2022, the study investigates the factors influencing states' voting patterns and the discursive strategies employed to articulate national interests. Grounded in realism, the analysis focuses on Latin America, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, with particular attention to Brazil, Thailand, and Israel. Employing Van Dijk's Critical Discourse Analysis, the study deciphers the rhetoric of representatives from these countries to reveal the role of the United Nations General Assembly and how countries utilize this platform. The findings reveal that the discourse of Brazil, Israel, and Thailand was predominantly driven by their national interests, focusing on promoting peaceful dialogue and critiquing the liberal international order. This study contributes to the broader academic literature on political realism showcasing the limitation of international institutions in addressing the global issues. We believe this study will be interesting for academics, policymakers, and practitioners seeking insights into the intricacies of international relations in times of crisis.

The reconciliation of ideological perspectives within BRICS: exploring geopolitical, economic, and cultural threads toward a unipolar world system

This research investigates how the BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa – have reconciled their disparate ideological viewpoints and how this has affected the existing global power dynamics. It examines how the BRICS bloc interacts with the Western-led international order while operating within distinct political, economic, and cultural frameworks. This study critically explores whether BRICS ultimately strengthens or weakens the prevailing unipolar global system, dominated by the United States and its allies, or contributes to a shift toward a bipolar or multipolar world. The study focuses on how BRICS functions within the parameters of the existing global system while simultaneously advocating for transformation.

Hedging as a Security Strategy for Restrained Middle Powers: The Case of Türkiye

The growing multipolarity of the international order in recent years has garnered a renewed interest in middle-power behavior in international politics. A similar trend can also be observed in categorizing them based on different factors. This article draws on the distinction between overambitious and restrained middle powers and argues that the hedging strategy can provide a well-suited framework for a distinct restrained middle power identity. The focus will be on Türkiye’s attitude toward Russia since the invasion of Ukraine. The analysis suggests that the hedging strategy offers a viable alternative for Türkiye in responding to contemporary challenges and increasing its gains. Moreover, it is also reliable for other restrained middle powers facing a geopolitical landscape characterized by tension, conflict, and an increasingly assertive local rising great power.

Positioning Power: India’s Global South Diplomacy in a Transitional International Order

Positioning Power: India’s Global South Diplomacy in a Transitional International Order

INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF FIGHTING CRIME IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY

In this article, the authors reviewed international experience in security in the digital space, which requires great attention and analysis, as the level of information security threats increases. The authors emphasize that the rapid development of technology and the spread of digital services have created both new opportunities for social and economic progress and serious threats, including cybercrime at the international level. The article examines various aspects of globalization, such as the integration of international markets, cross-border interaction, and information exchange, which significantly complicate the processes of combating crime. Special attention is given to the study of transnational criminal networks that actively exploit the advantages of information technologies to carry out their illegal activities on a global scale, necessitating radically new approaches to international cooperation and coordination of efforts in addressing such threats. The authors propose detailed strategies for countering crimes associated with the use of globalization technologies, including improving cybersecurity legislation, developing educational initiatives aimed at increasing the legal literacy of the population, and implementing innovative law enforcement methods. The article also analyzes the measures being taken in the Republic of Kazakhstan to combat these threats, emphasizing the importance of international cooperation and the exchange of best practices in this field. In conclusion, the authors draw conclusions about the need to adapt national strategies to the new realities of a globalized world, which involves creating integrated mechanisms for preventing crimes in the digital environment, strengthening international law and order, and developing global standards to counter cybercrime. This article makes a significant contribution to the discussion on the legal aspects of combating crime in the context of globalization and the information society, offering a comprehensive approach to addressing these complex challenges.

Friends as neighbors? Geographic closeness improves support to other governments

This paper delves into the dynamic relationship between where the conflict takes place and public support for military intervention in the context of friendly countries facing aggression. Focusing on the recent surge of Western assistance to Ukraine and the growing concerns about China–Taiwan tensions, our experimental study, conducted in Japan and Czechia, investigates whether regional proximity influences individuals’ willingness to endorse the use of force. Findings reveal significant variations in support based on the distance from the conflict zone, with Czech respondents less inclined to support intervention in Taiwan, contrasting with Japanese respondents. These insights pose critical considerations for the future of the liberal international order and military planning, underscoring the challenges in garnering widespread public backing for interventions in geographically distant scenarios.