2. Government S-1740 INTERNATIONAL LAW Summer 2006 Professor Beth Simmons bsimmons@latte.harvard.edu Office: 1737 Cambridge Street, CGIS-N212.

3. OUTLINE I.What is International Law? II.What This Course Is (and Is Not) About III.Topics on the Syllabus IV.Goals of the Course V.Requirements of the Course VI.Readings VII.Teaching Assistants

4. Definition of International Law A body of principles, customs, and rules recognized as effectively binding obligations by sovereign states in their mutual relations.

5. Major Questions Why make international agreements? Why do agreements take the form they do? How and when do legal agreements affect governments’ and others’ behavior? Does the U.S. have a real interest in IL? How universally accepted is IL? How has IL shaped international politics? “Law is politics” - Louis Henkin

6. What this course IS about… Public international law Relationship between international law & international politics

7. What this course IS NOT about… Private international law

8. LAW SCHOOL

9. SYLLABUS Part I: Why International Law? Part II: Structures and Mechanics Part III: The Substance of International Legal Regulation Part IV: Towards Conclusions – International Law and International Politics

10. Control of Nuclear Weapons

11. The pre-emptive use of force

12. Holding individuals accountable

13. The right to self- determi- nation

14. The problem of enforcing human rights

15. Law and politics of intellectual property rights

16. Explaining the proliferation and form of trade agreements

17. Goals: be able to… Identify and understand key international law concepts and agreements Articulate contending arguments present in state conflicts Understand theories that shed light on the causes and consequences of international agreements. Apply knowledge of the above to new situations

18. REQUIREMENTS Discussion participation – 20% 3 quizzes, 10% each Final, August 17, 50%

19. Text: Slomanson, Fundamental Perspectives on International Law, 5 th edition

20. Additional Readings and Resources Course website: http://courses.fas.harvard.edu/sum/31918 http://courses.fas.harvard.edu/sum/31918 Required readings (online via course website) – Section readings – A few additional readings

21. Teaching Assistants: Asif Efrat: efrat@fas.harvard.edu Cosette Creamer creamer@fas.harvard.edu

22. Sections 9:00- 10:00 10:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:30 12:30- 1:30 1:30-2:30 LunchLecture Section A CGIS S-001 Asif Section D CGIS S-003 Cosette Section B CGIS S-001 Asif Section E CGIS S-003 Cosette Section C CGIS S-001 Asif Section F CGIS S-003 Cosette

23. OUTLINE I.The role of theory II.Realism A.Modern Realism’s precursors B.Realist Assumptions C.Critique of international law III.Rational functionalism A.Realist roots B.Explaining the demand for international law IV.Constructivism A.Critique of realism and rationalism B.The nature of politics C.Key concept: legitimacy V.Conclusions

24. The Role of Theory Legal Theory and Jurisprudence International Relations Theory

25. Modern Realism’s Precursors Nicolo Machiavelli, 1469-1527 Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679 Thucydides Circa 400 BC

26. Objective, rational science of politics is possible Anarchic nature of the international system Main concept of politics: interest defined as power. Agents: unitary, rational, self-regarding (“egoistic”) states Autonomy of political reasoning Modern Realist assumptions

27. Realist Critique of International Law Law is not central to the “structure” that determines international outcomes Law does not effectively govern international political behavior International law is too decentralized to be effective – Legislatively – Judicially – Enforcement

28. Rational Functionalism Puzzle: we observe things that don’t make sense if the realists are correct Must be a rational explanation for international cooperation, institutions, and law Assumptions shared with realists: – State actors are unified, rational, and self-interested – International system is anarchic

29. Explaining the demand for international law The microeconomic analogy of the firm States recognize the gains from cooperation The problem of “market failure” The function of international law – Clarifies contending claims – Improves information – Reduces transactions costs …making it possible to realize mutual gains

30. The Constructivist Critique Unanswered puzzles Too narrow a view of politics. Politics are: – Idiographic – Purposive – Ethical – Instrumental

31. Constructivism The social nature of politics The role of law Law Discourse, persuasion Socialization, identity Interests

32. Constructivism Key concept: legitimacy – A key political resource – The answer to the puzzle of obligation

33. Conclusions: Focus here is on international relations theory, not legal theory. Purpose of IR theory is to systematize thinking about actors, constraints, and outcomes. Realism emphasizes the central role of interests understood largely (though not exclusively) as material power. Rational functionalism shares many of realisms assumptions, but focuses on the possibility of joint gains as a motive for cooperation Constructivists critique both as impoverished. They emphasize the social nature of politics, legal discourse, identity and the influence of these on interests.