STATE IN THE HISTORICAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGAL CONTEXT
https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2017-106-2-18-28
Abstract
who developed the theory of social contract. The Hobbes model was transferred to the international community: the state acting within the international order began to be considered by analogy with the individual acting within internal order - as a subject who had absolute freedom, but voluntarily refused it for the purpose of ensuring safety ant protecting acquired rights. Although international law does not impose strict requirements on the elements forming the state, it presumes a certain character of the relationship between them. This relationship should be expressed in the sovereign and effective exercise of the government’s power over the population of the state within the territory of the state. A logical defect of the concept of sovereignty is that the absolute nature of state power, on which it insists, contradicts the state’s boundness by international law. In addition, using only one aspect to describe the state (manifestation
of the will), it ignores all the others. Indeed the state is not only the government that makes power decisions, but also the product of historical evolution, the cultural space, the national formation, the way to ensure the common good, the scope of the common will, the mechanism of social communication, etc. The author outlines five scenarios for the future. Whichever one is implemented, it is obvious that a society that first formulates a new agenda and implement it will gain the most important geopolitical
advantages.
About the Author
V. L. TOLSTYKHRussian Federation
Doctor of Juridical Sciences, Professor, Leading Scientific Researcher
References
1. Agnew J. Geopolitics: Revisioning the World Politics. New York: Routledge. 1998. 168 p.
2. Allot P. The Health of Nations. Society and Law beyond the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002. 454 p.
3. Arendt H. The Origins of Totalitarism. Moscow: TsentrKom Publ. 1996. 672 p. (In Russ.)
4. Aristotle. Politics. Moscow: AST Publ.; Astrel’ Publ. 2012. 393 p. (In Russ.)
5. Bluntschli I.K. Sovremennoe mezhdunarodnoe pravo tsivilizovannykh gosudarstv, izlozhennoe v vide kodeksa [Modern International Law of Civilized Nations prepared in a form of a code]. Moscow: tip. Indrikh Publ. 1876. 634 p. (In Russ.)
6. Bull H. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan. 1977. 335 p.
7. Carty A. Philosophy of international law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2007. 255 p.
8. Cicero Marcus Tullius. Dialogues. On State. On Laws. Moscow:Nauka Publ. 224 p. (In Russ.)
9. Habermas J. The Divided West. Moscow: Ves’ mir. 2008. 192 p. (In Russ.)
10. Henkin L. International law: politics and values. Dordrecht; Boston: M. Nijhoff. 1995. 376 p.
11. Hobbes T. Leviathan or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil. - Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 2 [Works in two volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ. 1991. P. 3-546. (In Russ.)
12. Jessup Ph.C. A modern law of nations. An Introduction. New York: Macmillan. 1948. 236 p.
13. Kant I. Perpetual Peace. - Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 6 [Works in six volumes. Vol. 6]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ. 1966. P. 258-309. (In Russ.)
14. Kelsen H. Principles of international law. New York: Rinehart & Company, Inc. 1952.461 p.
15. Kol’yar K. Mezhdunarodnye organizatsii i uchrezhdeniya [International Organizations and Structures]. Moscow:Progress Publ. 1972. 632 p. (In Russ.)
16. Koskenniemi M.. From Apology to Utopia: the Structure of International Legal Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. 704 p.
17. Levin D.B. Osnovnye problemy sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo prava [Main Problems of Modern International Law]. Moscow: Gosyurizdat Publ. 1958.275 p. (In Russ.)
18. Oppenheim L. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. T. 1 Polutom 1. [International Law. Vol. 1. Half 1]. Moscow: Gos. izd-vo inostr. lit. Publ. 1948. 408 p. (In Russ.)
19. Plato. The Laws. - Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v odnom tome [Complete Set of Works in one volume]. Moscow: Al’fa-kniga Publ. 2013. P. 1036-1261. (In Russ.)
20. Politicheskie struktury epokhi feodalizma v Zapadnoi Evrope VI – XVII vv. [Political Structures of the Feudal Epoch in the Western Europe of 6th-12th centuries]. Leningrad: Nauka Publ. 1990. 250 p. (In Russ.)
21. Pravovaya mysl’: Antologiya. Sost. V.P. Malakhov. [Legal Thought: an anthology. Comp. by V.P. Malakhov]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt Publ; Ekaterinburg: Delovaya kniga Publ. 2003.1016 p. (In Russ.)
22. Spitz J.-F. John Locke et les fondements de la liberté moderne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 2001. 335 p.
23. Tolstykh V.L. Reshenie arbitrazhnogo suda po delu o Yuzhno-Kitaiskom more ot 12 iyulya 2016 g. (Filippiny i Kitai), mezhdunarodnaya reaktsiya na nego, kommentarii [Arbitral award in the matter of the South China Sea arbitration (Philippines and China) on 12 July 2016, international reaction thereto and a commentary]. - Evraziiskii yuridicheskii zhurnal [Eurasian Juridical Journal]. 2016. № 8 (89). P. 47-55. (In Russ.)
24. Utchenko S.L. Politicheskie ucheniya drevnego Rima [Political Doctrines of the Ancient Rome]. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 1997. 256 p. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
TOLSTYKH V.L. STATE IN THE HISTORICAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGAL CONTEXT. Moscow Journal of International Law. 2017;106(2):18-28. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2017-106-2-18-28