Role of Contingency in Formation of International Law

INTRODUCTION. A group of foreign international scholars has recently published a collective monograph – “Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories” [Contingency in International Law…2021]. The starting point of this work is the question why international law is as we know it today, and whether it could be different. The problem of possible alternative ways for development of international law calls challenges the necessity of the current state of international law and urges to research the interrelation among the power of international law itself, historical context and wills of subjects involved in international law-creating.

MATERIAL AND METHODS. The research material for the present article is the collective monograph “Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories” edited by I. Venzke and K.J. Heller. The study of the presented ideas is based on general scientific methods and private legal methods, as the historical and legal approach.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The development of a national international legal scholarship of the theory of international law sometimes needs an intellectual impulse, a bold statement of questions that challenge the dominant theoretical principles. In this regard, the question on the possibility of different ways of developing international law due to a variety of factors, could be a trigger for rethinking positivist attitudes in the Russian theory of international law. The intention in revising the classical theses does not imply rejection of established legal positions, but, on the contrary, it necessitates fruitful reflections on traditional tenets. This assumption is illustrated with the concept of the international legal policy of the state, which originates from the classical theory of coordination of wills, and at the same time makes a number of assumptions or explanations which could answer questions about contingencies in formation of international legal norms. Relying on the materials of the book edited by I. Venzke and K.J. Heller the article provides outlook on questions about chance and regularities in determining the content of international law, about role of context in the creation and development of international law, about the sovereign wills and role of contingencies and extra-legal factors in the concept of international legal policy.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In contrast to the theory of coordination of wills, which is based on strict positivist grounds, the concept of the international legal policy of State assumes influence of extra-legal factors for arrangement of international legal argumentation of States. For example, the problem of context is of great importance in determining the possibility of legitimizing certain international legal positions of State. The arguments of States as such with references to norms of international law remain fruitless outside certain context (including present content of international law, current state of international relations, topics on the international agenda). This is because legitimated legal norms fix the current results of coordination of wills among States, which depend on interaction of legal and nonlegal factors. But it is also important to understand limits of assumptions about impact of certain factors on the content of international law. So, on the one hand, the role of context should not be overestimated, since international law does not succumb to conjuncture, but develops consistently. At the same time, by studying international legal policies of States, one should avoid false determinism. It poses the risk to trace a wrong strategic line of State's legal arguments with over-shadowing ‘irrelevant’ facts. Thus, questions that open perspectives on seemingly solved problems make it possible to develop established doctrinal ideas in a new direction. However, it is necessary to take into account methodological limits of new assumptions for consistent development of contemporary national discipline of international law.

1. Al Attar M. Subverting Eurocentric Epistemology: The Value of Nonsense When Designing Counterfactuals. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 145-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0009

2. Carty A. Critical International Law: Recent Trends in the Theory of International Law. – European Journal of International Law. 1991. Vol. 2. Issue 1. P. 66–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/2.1.66

3. Cohen F. Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach. – Columbia Law Review. 1935. No. 35. P. 809- 849.

4. Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. 576 p.

5. Craven M. Theorizing the Turn to History in International Law. – The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law. Ed. by A. Orford, F. Hoffmann. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2016. P. 21-37.

6. Crow K. Bandung’s Fate in Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021.. P. 441-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0026

7. Delbrück J. Max Huber's Sociological Approach to International Law Revisited. – European Journal of International Law. 2007. Vol. 18. Issue 1. P. 97–113.

8. Desautels-Stein J. The Realist and the Visionary: Property, Sovereignty, and the Problem of Social Change. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 77-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0005

9. Dos Reis F. Contingencies in International Legal Histories: Origins and Observers. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 111-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0007

10. El Boudouhi S. Barcelona Traction Re-Imagined : The ICJ as a World Court for Foreign Investment Cases?. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 404-423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0024

11. Elferink A.O. What If the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea had Enteredinto Force Unamended: Business as Usual or Dystopia?. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 215-230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0013

12. Evans R.J. Altered Pasts: Counterfactuals in History. New York: Little, Brown. 2014. 176 p.

13. Gordon G. The Time of Contingency in International Law. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 162-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0010

14. Hughes D. How States Persuade: An Account of International Legal Argument Upon the Use of Force. – Georgetown Journal of International Law. 2019. Vol. 50. P. 839- 946.

15. Hurd I. Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics. – International Organization. 1999. Vol. 53. P. 379– 408.

16. Jessop B. The State: Past, Present, Future. Cambridge: Polity Press. 2015. 316 p.

17. Johns F. [et al.]. Introduction – Events: the Force of International Law. Ed. by F. Johns, R. Joyce, S. Pahuja. Abingdon: Routledge. 2011. 312 p.

18. Johns F. On Dead Circuits and Non-Events. P. 25-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0002

19. Kelsall M.S. ‘Poisonous Flowers on the Dust-heap of a Dying Capitalism’: The United Nations Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations, Contingency and Failure in International Law. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 461-478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0027

20. Kolb R. Réflexions sur les politiques juridiques extérieures. Paris : Pedone. 2015. 138 p.

21. Kolla E. Contravention and Creation of Law during the French Revolution. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 481-495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0028

22. Kolodkin R.A. Аragmentatsiya mezhdunarodnogo prava [Fragmentation of International Law]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2005. No. 2. P. 38-61. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2005-2-38-61

23. Koskenniemi M. From Apology To Utopia: The Structure Of International Legal Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2005. 704 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493713

24. Koskenniemi M. Histories of International Law: Significance and Problems for a Critical View. – Temple International & Comparative Law Journal. 2013. Vol. 27. P. 215- 240.

25. Lacharrière G. L. La politique juridique extérieure. Paris : Economica.1983. 236 p.

26. Mackinnon E.S. Contingencies of Context: Legacies of the Algerian Revolution in the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions Mackinnon. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 479-492. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0019

27. Maganza B. Unveiling Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions: Contingency, Necessity, and Possibility in International Humanitarian Law. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 336-348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0020

28. Mälksoo L. International Law in Russian Textbooks: What’s in the Doctrinal Pluralism?. – Göttingen Journal of International Law. 2009. Vol. 1. P. 279-290.

29. Mälksoo L. Russian Approaches to International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2017. 240 p.

30. Marks S. False Contingency. – Current Legal Problems. 2009. Vol. 62. Issue 1. P. 1-21. DOI:10.1093/clp/62.1.1

31. Martens F.F. vremennoe mezhdunarodnoe pravo tsivilizovannykh narodov. T.1 [Modern International Law of Civilized Nations]. Saint-Petersburg. 1898. 464 p. (in Russ.)

32. Moyn S. From Situated Freedom to Plausible Worlds. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 515-524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0030

33. Nijman J. An Enlarged Sense of Possibility for International Law: Seeking change by Doing History. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 92-108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0006

34. Oppenheim L. The Science of International Law: its task and method. – American Journal of International Law. 1908. Vol. 2. P. 313-356.

35. Ostřanský J. From a Fortuitous Transplant to a Fundamental Principle of Law? The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations and the Possibilities of a Different Law. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 424-440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0025

36. Özsu U. The Necessity of Contingency: Method and Marxism in International Law. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 60-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0004

37. Painter G.R. Contingency in International Legal History: Why now?. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 44-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0003

38. Pottage A. Power as an Art of Contingency: Luhmann, Deleuze, Foucault. – Economy and Society. 1998. Vol. 27. Issue 1. P. 1-27. DOI: 10.1080/03085149800000001

39. Rad’ko T.N., Medvedeva N.T. Pozitivizm kak nauchnoe nasledie i perspektiva razvitiya prava Rossii. [Positivism as a scientific heritage and perspective for development of law in Russia]. – Gosudarstvo i pravo. 2005. No. 3. P. 5-12. (In Russ.)

40. Shestakova K.D., Vissenberg A.S. Evolyutsiya diskursa o fragmentatsii mezhdunarodnogo prava [The Evolution of Discourse on Fragmentation of International Law]. – Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. 2020. No. 1. P. 29-49. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.25136/2644-5514.2020.1.29871

41. Shugurov M. Perspektivy razvitiya kontseptsii mezhdunarodno-pravovoi politiki [Perspectives of development of conception of international law policy]. – Rossiiskii zhurnal pravovykh issledovanii. 2015. Vol. 2. No. 2. P. 63- 72. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/RJLS18024

42. Skinner Q. Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. – Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics. Ed. by James Tully. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 1988. P. 3-53.

43. Szabla C. Contingent Movements? The Differential Decolonisations of International Refugee and Migration Law and Governance. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 199-214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0012

44. Tedeschini M. Historical Base and Legal Superstructure. Reading Contingency and Necessity in the Tadić Case. – Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories. Ed. by I. Venzke, K. J. Heller. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2021. P. 129-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898036.003.0008

45. Tolstykh V.L. Оcherk sovremennogo sostoyaniya rossiiskoi doktriny mezhdunarodnogo prava [The current state of the Russian doctrine of international law: an essay]. – Elektronnoe prilozhenie k “Rossiiskomu yuridicheskomu zhurnalu”. 2016. No. 3. P. 50-58. (In Russ.)

46. Tunkin G.I. Mirnoe sosushchestvovanie i mezhdunarodnoe pravo [Coexistence and International Law]. – Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo. 1956a. No. 7. P. 3-13. (In Russ.)

47. Tunkin G. I. Osnovy sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo prava [Principles of Contemporary International Law]. Moscow. 1956b. 48 p. (In Russ.)

48. Tunkin G. I. Teoriya mezhdunarodnogo prava [Theory of international law]. Moscow: Zertsalo Publ. 2006. 416 p. (In Russ.)

49. Venzke I. International Law as an Argumentative Practice: On Wohlrapp’s Concept of Argument. – Transnational Legal Theory. 2016. Vol. 7. P. 9-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2016.1192357

50. Vylegzhanin A.N., Dudikina I.P. Ponyatie “mezhdunarodno-pravovaya politika gosudarstva” [The Politics of International Law as a Concept]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2016. No. 4. P. 21-37. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2016-4-21-37