mgimolawМосковский журнал международного праваMoscow Journal of International Law0869-00492619-0893Moscow State Institute of International Relations10.24833/0869-0049-2020-3-27-43mgimolaw-368Research ArticleМЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ ПРАВО И ПОЛИТИКАКонцепция международно-правовой политики в зарубежных сравнительно-правовых исследованияхConcept of International Legal Policy in Foreign Comparative Legal Studieshttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0593-3101МагомедоваО. С.MagomedovaO. S.

Ольга Сергеевна Магомедова, Аспирант кафедры международного права, Проспект Вернадского, д. 76, Москва, 119454, Российская Федерация

Olga S. Magomedova, PhD Student, Department of International law, 76, pr. Vernadskogo, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119454

olga.magomedova.96@mail.ruМосковский государственный институт международных отношений (Университет) МИД РоссииРоссияMoscow State Institute of International Relations (University) MFA RussiaRussian Federation202026122020032743Copyright © Магомедова О.С., 20202020Магомедова О.С.Magomedova O.S.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/368ВВЕДЕНИЕ

ВВЕДЕНИЕ. Концепция международно-правовой политики стала разрабатываться в международно-правовых исследованиях относительно недавно, хотя сам феномен международно-правовой политики государства существует столько же, сколько само государство в его отношениях с внешним миром. Международно-правовая политика как политика государства в отношении правовых аспектов его международных отношений была концептуально оформлена только в 80-е гг. XX века. Прежде круг ее вопросов или их аспекты разделялись между юристами-международниками и исследователями международных отношений. Однако международно-правовая политика - это цельная система подходов государства к вопросам международного права. Большой интерес представляет сравнение позиций государств по конкретным вопросам или сравнение тактики государств на отдельных этапах реализации международно-правовых норм. Данная статья посвящена вопросу о том, можно ли интегрировать сравнительные исследования международно-правовой политики государств в рамки уже существующих сравнительно-правовых исследований подходов государств к международному праву (проект так называемого сравнительного международного права) и сравнительно-правовых исследований нормативного оформления межгосударственных отношений (проект сравнительного права внешних сношений).

МАТЕРИАЛЫ И МЕТОДЫ

МАТЕРИАЛЫ И МЕТОДЫ. В статье рассматриваются теоретические вопросы преимущественно на основе доктринальных источников. Для ретроспективного анализа сравнительного метода в международном праве используются работы, опубликованные на протяжении XX в. отечественными и зарубежными правоведами. Уделяется внимание основоположникам компаративистской практики в международно-правовых исследованиях. Поскольку проект сравнительного права внешних сношений был разработан американскими правоведами на основе национальной правовой доктрины и практики, в исследовании также используются материалы национальной судебной практики 30-40-х гг., в которой был сформулирован принцип исключительности полномочий исполнительной власти во внешней политике страны. В исследовании применялись методы анализа, синтеза, систематизации, а также историко-правовой и сравнительно-правовой методы.

РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ

РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ. В статье проводится краткий обзор идей концепции международно-правовой политики государства, с учетом того, что одним из первых авторов такой концепции считается французский юрист и дипломат Ги де Лашаррьер. Рассматривается история становления права внешних сношений в США и её доктринальная оценка с точки зрения конституционных основ в государстве. Обозначаются различные точки зрения на содержание и подходы к обоснованию права внешних сношений. Проводится сравнительный анализ концепции международно-правовой политики государств и понятия права внешних сношений, как двух подходов к оценке государством своей правовой позиции на международной арене. Различия выявляются по шести параметрам: источники, функции, субъекты двух концепций, внимание к распределению внешнеполитических полномочий в государстве, вопрос о соотношении международного права и национального права, значение национальных судов в толковании и применении международно-правовых норм. На основе отсылки к понятию “национального интереса” констатируется некорректность приписывания международно-правовой политики международным организациям и надгосударственным образованиям. В работе отражается развитие тенденции к противополаганию подходов государств к международному праву, начиная с понятий “международного права переходного периода”, “между- народно-правовых систем” и обращаясь к понятиям “национального подхода к международному праву”, “правового стиля”, “правовой культуры”. Краткое исследование формирует представление о разнообразии подходов к сравнимым аспектам международного права, среди которых могут утвердиться и сравнительные исследования международно-правовой политики государств.

ВЫВОДЫ И ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ

ВЫВОДЫ И ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ. На первый взгляд сравнительный метод малоприменим к международному праву. Однако универсальность международного права не исключает расхождений в подходах к нему. Если исследование международно-правовой политики, определяемой национальными интересами каждого государства позволяет систематизировать позиции государства в единую стратегию, то сравнительный метод допускает как классическое тематическое сравнение взглядов государств, так и открывает возможности сравнить внутренние закономерности международно-правовой политики и определяющие её факторы. Тенденция к исследованию международно-правовых вопросов с точки зрения проблем макро-социальной идентичности государств выразилась в растущей популярности сравнительных международно-правовых исследований (проект сравнительного международного права), и выдвижении проекта сравнительного права внешних сношений (под руководством американского правоведа К.А. Бредли). Для разработки концепции международно-правовой политики государства не применимы методологические установки проекта сравнительного права внешних сношений. Но при этом сходство основных тезисов концепции и проекта сравнительного международного права подсказывает, что дальнейшие разработки концепции могут стать новым направлением проекта.

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION. International legal policy is a new object in international legal studies, although this phenomenon exists as long as the external relations of States. International legal policy is a rare case of research subject, which remains unexplored. International legal policy as a Concept of State's policy towards legal aspects of international relations was formed in the 80-s of last century. Earlier the questions and their particular aspects now embraced by international legal policy were divided between international lawyers and international relations researchers. However international legal policy is an integral system of State's approaches to international legal matters, therefore its punctual research is relevant only from comparative point of view. It would be interesting to compare States' positions on concrete issues or States' tactics at different stages of realization of international legal norms. This article concerns the question whether comparative studies of international legal policy can be integrated into existing fields of comparative foreign relations law or of comparative research of international law.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article surveys theoretic questions primarily on the base of doctrinal sources. The retrospective analysis of the comparative method in international law is based on works published by Russian and foreign experts during the XX century. Particular attention is drawn upon works of founders of comparative research in international legal studies. The concept of foreign relations law in the scholarship and practice of the U.S. is researched on the base of national case law, which formulated the principle of executive exceptionalism in State foreign policy. Research work is realized with the use of analysis, synthesis, systematisation, as well as methods of historical and comparative method.

RESEARCH RESULTS

RESEARCH RESULTS. The Article consistently reveals meaning and the content of international legal policy as one of the authors of the concept, French lawyer and diplomat G. de Lacharriere, presented it. The Article examines the history of foreign relations law in the U.S. and presents its doctrinal estimations from viewpoint of American constitutional law. The research work specifies different points of view on content of foreign relations law and approaches to its justification. Indeed international legal policy and foreign relations law can be compared as two types of State’s approach to its legal position on the international scene. There are six parameters for comparison: sources, functions, subjects of both concepts, questions on allocation of foreign powers in the State, on relationship between international and national law, on the role of national courts in interpretation and application of international norms. In consideration of “national interest” concept the attribution of international legal policy to international organisations or supranational association is judged as incorrect. The article examines the question of applicability of comparative method in the international law within the discourse among scholars on how differently modern States evaluate international legal norms. Analysis of the tendency to contrasting States’ approaches to the international law encompasses its development from notions “international law of transitional period”, “international legal systems”, to notions “national approach”, “legal style”, “legal culture”. Brief survey of comparative international law gives perspective on diversity of approaches to comparable aspects of the international law. Comparative studies of international legal policy could get consolidated among them.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. At first sight the comparative method is hardly applicable to the international law. However the universality of the international law doesn’t exclude variety of approaches to it. The research into international legal policy determined by national interests of every State allows to systemize positions of a State into a single strategy. At the same time comparative method doesn’t only provide classical comparison of States’ positions by issues, but also offers to compare inner-workings of the international legal policy and shaping factors. Nowadays in the context of trends on diversification of international relations (fragmentation, regionalisation), growing popularity of the comparative method translated into comparative foreign relations law and comparative international law. However international legal policy doesn’t correspond with categorial apparatus of comparative foreign relations law. International legal policy is nor able to apply methodological tenets of comparative international law due to its multivalued content. Most likely comparative studies of international legal policy can become a new approach within comparative international law, which should be based on the principles of concreteness and consistency.

международно-правовая политикаправо внешних сношенийсравнительное международное правосравнительный методнациональные интересынациональные подходы к международному правусовременные правовые исследованияinternational legal policyforeign relations lawcomparative international lawcomparative methodnational interestsnational approaches to international lawcontemporary legal studiesReferencesAbebe D. Great Power Politics and the Structure of Foreign Relations Law. – Chicago Journal of International Law. 2009. No. 10. P. 125-141.Abebe D. Great Power Politics and the Structure of Foreign Relations Law. – Chicago Journal of International Law. 2009. No. 10. P. 125-141.Abdulqawi Yu. Diversity of Legal Traditions and International Law: Keynote Address. – Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2013. No. 24. P. 681-703.Abdulqawi Yu. Diversity of Legal Traditions and International Law: Keynote Address. – Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2013. No. 24. P. 681-703.Anghie A., Chimni B.S. Third World Approaches to International Law and Individual Responsibility in International Conflicts. – Chinese Journal of International law. 2003. Vol. 2. Issue 1. P. 77-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cjilaw.a000480Anghie A., Chimni B.S. Third World Approaches to International Law and Individual Responsibility in International Conflicts. – Chinese Journal of International law. 2003. Vol. 2. Issue 1. P. 77-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cjilaw.a000480Beitzinger A.J. A History of American Political Thought. Wipf and Stock Publishers. 2011. 640 p.Beitzinger A.J. A History of American Political Thought. Wipf and Stock Publishers. 2011. 640 p.Bellinger III John B. Trump Administration's Approach to International Law and Courts: Are We Seeing a Turn for the Worse? – 51 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 7. 2019 URL: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol51/iss1/20/ (accessed date: 15.08.2020).Bellinger III John B. Trump Administration's Approach to International Law and Courts: Are We Seeing a Turn for the Worse? – 51 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 7. 2019 URL: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol51/iss1/20/ (accessed date: 15.08.2020).Bradley C.A. A new American Foreign Affairs Law? – University of Colorado Law Review. Vol. 70. No. 4. 1999. P. 1089-1108.Bradley C.A. A new American Foreign Affairs Law? – University of Colorado Law Review. Vol. 70. No. 4. 1999. P. 1089-1108.Bradley C.A. What is Foreign Relations Law? – The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. Ed. by Curtis A. Bradley. Oxford University Press. 2019. 856 p.Bradley C.A. What is Foreign Relations Law? – The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. Ed. by Curtis A. Bradley. Oxford University Press. 2019. 856 p.Butler W.E. Comparative Approaches to International Law. – Recueil des Cours. Hague Academy of International law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 1986. P. 9-90.Butler W.E. Comparative Approaches to International Law. – Recueil des Cours. Hague Academy of International law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 1986. P. 9-90.Cazala J. Retour sur un Classique: Guy de Lacharrière, La politique juridique extérieure. – Revue générale de droit international public. 2013. No. 2. P. 411-416.Cazala J. Retour sur un Classique: Guy de Lacharrière, La politique juridique extérieure. – Revue générale de droit international public. 2013. No. 2. P. 411-416.Comparative International Law (eds.) A. Roberts, P.B. Stephan, P.H. Verdier, M. Versteeg. Oxford University Press. 2018. 640 p.Comparative International Law (eds.) A. Roberts, P.B. Stephan, P.H. Verdier, M. Versteeg. Oxford University Press. 2018. 640 p.EU Foreign Relations Law – Constitutional Fundamentals. Eds. by M. Cremona, B. de Witte. Hart Publishing. 2008. 328 p.EU Foreign Relations Law – Constitutional Fundamentals. Eds. by M. Cremona, B. de Witte. Hart Publishing. 2008. 328 p.Forteau M. Comparative International Law Within, Not Against, International Law: Lessons from the International Law Commission. – The American Journal of International Law. 2015. Vol. 109. P.498-513.Forteau M. Comparative International Law Within, Not Against, International Law: Lessons from the International Law Commission. – The American Journal of International Law. 2015. Vol. 109. P.498-513.Gouttefarde F. Les Communautes Europeennes et les Retorsions Croisees a l'OMC: Aspects de la Politique Juridique Exterieure de l'Union Europeenne. – Revue Quebecoise de Droit International. 2004. Vol. 17.2. P. 33-79.Gouttefarde F. Les Communautes Europeennes et les Retorsions Croisees a l'OMC: Aspects de la Politique Juridique Exterieure de l'Union Europeenne. – Revue Quebecoise de Droit International. 2004. Vol. 17.2. P. 33-79.Gutteridge H.C. Comparative Law and the Law of Nations in International Law in Comparative perspective. Ed. by W.E. Butler. 1980. 305 p.Gutteridge H.C. Comparative Law and the Law of Nations in International Law in Comparative perspective. Ed. by W.E. Butler. 1980. 305 p.Henkin L. Foreign Affairs and the U.S. Constitution. 1976. 666 p.Henkin L. Foreign Affairs and the U.S. Constitution. 1976. 666 p.Jouannet E. French and American Perspectives on International Law: Legal Cultures and International Law. – Main Law Review. 2006. No. 58. P. 291-336.Jouannet E. French and American Perspectives on International Law: Legal Cultures and International Law. – Main Law Review. 2006. No. 58. P. 291-336.Kapustin A.Ya. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i vyzovy XXI veka [International Law and Challenges of the 21st century]. – Journal of Russian law. 2014. No. 7. P. 5-19. (in Russ.)Kapustin A.Ya. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i vyzovy XXI veka [International Law and Challenges of the 21st century]. – Journal of Russian law. 2014. No. 7. P. 5-19. (in Russ.)Koh H.H. The Trump Administration and International Law. – Washburn Law Journal. 2017. Vol 56. P. 413-469.Koh H.H. The Trump Administration and International Law. – Washburn Law Journal. 2017. Vol 56. P. 413-469.Koskenniemi M. Imagining the Rule of Law: Rereading of the Grotian 'Tradition'. – European Journal of International Law. 2019. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 17-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chz017Koskenniemi M. Imagining the Rule of Law: Rereading of the Grotian 'Tradition'. – European Journal of International Law. 2019. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 17-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chz017Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. – European Journal of International Law. 1990. No. 4. P. 4-32.Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. – European Journal of International Law. 1990. No. 4. P. 4-32.Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. – European Journal of International Law. 2009. Vol. 20. No. 1. P. 7-19.Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. – European Journal of International Law. 2009. Vol. 20. No. 1. P. 7-19.Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. Bloomsbury Publishing. 2011. 371 p.Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International Law. Bloomsbury Publishing. 2011. 371 p.Lacharrière G.L. La Politique juridique extérieure. Economica. Enjeux internationaux. 1983. 236 p.Lacharrière G.L. La Politique juridique extérieure. Economica. Enjeux internationaux. 1983. 236 p.Larik J. EU Foreign Relations Law as a Field of Scholarship. – AJIL Unbound. 2017. Vol. 111. P. 321-325. DOI: doi:10.1017/aju.2017.88Larik J. EU Foreign Relations Law as a Field of Scholarship. – AJIL Unbound. 2017. Vol. 111. P. 321-325. DOI: doi:10.1017/aju.2017.88Lauterpacht H. The So-Called Anglo-American and Continental Schools of Thought in International Law. – British Yearbook of International Law. 1931. No. 12. P. 31-62.Lauterpacht H. The So-Called Anglo-American and Continental Schools of Thought in International Law. – British Yearbook of International Law. 1931. No. 12. P. 31-62.Lauterpacht H. Règles générales du droit de la paix. Receuil des Cours. 1937. Vol. 62. P. 95-422.Lauterpacht H. Règles générales du droit de la paix. Receuil des Cours. 1937. Vol. 62. P. 95-422.Levin D.B. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo, vneshnjaja politika i diplomatija [International Law, Foreign Policy and Diplomacy]. M.: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija Publ. 1981. 144 p. (in Russ.)Levin D.B. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo, vneshnjaja politika i diplomatija [International Law, Foreign Policy and Diplomacy]. M.: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija Publ. 1981. 144 p. (in Russ.)Lorca A.B. Universal International Law: Nineteenth-Century Histories of Imposition and Appropriation. – Harward International Law Journal. 2010. Vol. 51. No. 2. P. 475-552.Lorca A.B. Universal International Law: Nineteenth-Century Histories of Imposition and Appropriation. – Harward International Law Journal. 2010. Vol. 51. No. 2. P. 475-552.Lorca A.B. International Law in Latin America or Latin American International Law? Rise, Fall, and Retrieval of a Tradition of Legal Thinking and Political Imagination. – Harvard International Law Journal. 2006. No. 47. P. 283-305.Lorca A.B. International Law in Latin America or Latin American International Law? Rise, Fall, and Retrieval of a Tradition of Legal Thinking and Political Imagination. – Harvard International Law Journal. 2006. No. 47. P. 283-305.Mälskoo L. Russian Approaches to International Law. Oxford University Press. 2015. 240 p.Mälskoo L. Russian Approaches to International Law. Oxford University Press. 2015. 240 p.Mamlyuk B.N., Mattei U. Comparative International Law. – Brooklyn Journal of International law. 2011. Vol. 36:2. P. 386-452.Mamlyuk B.N., Mattei U. Comparative International Law. – Brooklyn Journal of International law. 2011. Vol. 36:2. P. 386-452.McDougal M.S. The Comparative Study of Law for Policy Purposes: Value Clarification as an Instrument of Democratic World Order. – The American Journal of Comparative Law. Vol. 1. 1952. P. 24-57.McDougal M.S. The Comparative Study of Law for Policy Purposes: Value Clarification as an Instrument of Democratic World Order. – The American Journal of Comparative Law. Vol. 1. 1952. P. 24-57.McLachlan C. The Allocative Function of Foreign Relations Law. – The British Yearbook of International Law. 2012. P. 1-32.McLachlan C. The Allocative Function of Foreign Relations Law. – The British Yearbook of International Law. 2012. P. 1-32.McWhinney E. Operational Methodology and Philosophy for Accommodation of the Contending International Legal Systems. – Virginia Law Review. 1964. No. 50. P. 36-57.McWhinney E. Operational Methodology and Philosophy for Accommodation of the Contending International Legal Systems. – Virginia Law Review. 1964. No. 50. P. 36-57.Megret F. International Law as Law – The Cambridge companion to International Law. Eds. J. Crawford, M. Koskenniemi. Cambridge. 2012. 471 p.Megret F. International Law as Law – The Cambridge companion to International Law. Eds. J. Crawford, M. Koskenniemi. Cambridge. 2012. 471 p.Messineo F. Is There an Italian Conception of International Law? – Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2013. Vol. 4 No. 2. P. 879-905. DOI: 10.7574/cjicl.02.04.13Messineo F. Is There an Italian Conception of International Law? – Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2013. Vol. 4 No. 2. P. 879-905. DOI: 10.7574/cjicl.02.04.13Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. Ed. by C.A. Bradley. Oxford University Press. 2019. 896 p.Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. Ed. by C.A. Bradley. Oxford University Press. 2019. 896 p.Özsu U. Agency, Universality and the Politics of International Legal History. – Harvard International Law Journal Online. 2010. Vol. 52. P. 58-72.Özsu U. Agency, Universality and the Politics of International Legal History. – Harvard International Law Journal Online. 2010. Vol. 52. P. 58-72.Pozdnjakov Je.A. Sistemnyj podhod i mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija [Systemic approach to international relations]. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 1976. 159 p. (in Russ.)Pozdnjakov Je.A. Sistemnyj podhod i mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija [Systemic approach to international relations]. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 1976. 159 p. (in Russ.)Purcell E.A. Understanding Curtiss-Wright. – Law and History Review. November 2013. Vol. 31. No. 4. P. 653-715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0738248013000461Purcell E.A. Understanding Curtiss-Wright. – Law and History Review. November 2013. Vol. 31. No. 4. P. 653-715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0738248013000461Roberts A. Comparative International Law? The role of national courts in creating and enforcing international law. – International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 2011. Vol. 60. P. 57-92.Roberts A. Comparative International Law? The role of national courts in creating and enforcing international law. – International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 2011. Vol. 60. P. 57-92.Roberts A., Stephan P.B., Verdier P.H., Versteeg M. Comparative International Law: framing the field. – The American Journal of International Law. 2015. Vol. 109. P. 467-474.Roberts A., Stephan P.B., Verdier P.H., Versteeg M. Comparative International Law: framing the field. – The American Journal of International Law. 2015. Vol. 109. P. 467-474.Rovira M. G.-S. The Politics of Interest in International Law. – The European Journal of International Law. 2014. Vol. 25. No. 3. P.765-793.Rovira M. G.-S. The Politics of Interest in International Law. – The European Journal of International Law. 2014. Vol. 25. No. 3. P.765-793.Sitaraman G., Wuerth I. The Normalization of foreign relations law. – Harvard Law Review. 2015. Vol. 128. No. 7. P. 1900-1978.Sitaraman G., Wuerth I. The Normalization of foreign relations law. – Harvard Law Review. 2015. Vol. 128. No. 7. P. 1900-1978.Talmon S. The United States under President Trump: Gravedigger of International Law. October 7, 2019. – Chinese Journal of International Law. URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3465460 (accessed date: 15.08.2020). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3465460Talmon S. The United States under President Trump: Gravedigger of International Law. October 7, 2019. – Chinese Journal of International Law. URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3465460 (accessed date: 15.08.2020). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3465460The Politics of International Law (ed) C. Reus-Smit. Cambridge University Press. 2004.The Politics of International Law (ed) C. Reus-Smit. Cambridge University Press. 2004.Tunkin G.I. International Law in the International System. – Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International. 1975. Vol. 147. P. 1-218.Tunkin G.I. International Law in the International System. – Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International. 1975. Vol. 147. P. 1-218.Vagts D.F. Hegemonic International Law. – American Journal of International Law. 2001. No. 95. P. 843-848.Vagts D.F. Hegemonic International Law. – American Journal of International Law. 2001. No. 95. P. 843-848.Vylegzhanin A.N., Dudykina I.P. The Ponyatiye vtzhdunarodno-pravovaya politika gosudarstva [Politics of International Law as a Concept]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2016. No. 4. P. 21-37. (in Russ.)Vylegzhanin A.N., Dudykina I.P. The Ponyatiye vtzhdunarodno-pravovaya politika gosudarstva [Politics of International Law as a Concept]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2016. No. 4. P. 21-37. (in Russ.)White G.E. The Transformation of the Constitutional Regime of Foreign Relations. – Virginia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 85, No. 1. P. 1-150.White G.E. The Transformation of the Constitutional Regime of Foreign Relations. – Virginia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 85, No. 1. P. 1-150.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.