Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order. By Gerry Simpson. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2004. xix, 353, (Bibliography) 18 and (Index) 20 pp. Paperback £22.99. ISBN 0521–53490–9.]

2005 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 505-506
Author(s):  
Douglas Guilfoyle
Keyword(s):  
Great Powers ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
International Legal Order

New Approaches to the History of International Law

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 555-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
UPENDRA BAXI
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of International Law

Anthony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty, and the Making of International Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005, ISBN 0521828929, 356 pp., £60.00 (hb).Gerry Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004, ISBN 0521827612, 414 pp., £65.00 (hb).

Conclusion

2019 ◽  
pp. 321-326
Author(s):  
Congyan Cai
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
American Exceptionalism ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Context ◽  
International Legal Order

This chapter concludes this book by comparing American exceptionalism and Chinese exceptionalism in the context of the rise and fall of great powers. It agrees that all great powers, compared with other countries, are capable of advocating international law that advances their values and interests; in this sense, there is Chinese exceptionalism. More importantly, it suggests that different great powers have different exceptionalism, thereby bring about different implications on international legal order. This chapter does not purport to argue that people should have a rosy expectation for Chinese exceptionalism. In light of international context and China’s own particularities, however, it is more likely that Chinese exceptionalism can bring about new promise for international legal order, thereby balancing American exceptionalism. Therefore, Chinese exceptionalism merits serious consideration with sympathy.

The Unsolved Riddle of International Constitutionalism

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-110
Author(s):  
Ignacio de la Rasilla del Moral
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
International Constitutionalism ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law

AbstractThe extremely diverse contributions present in the volume edited by Nicholas Tsagourias, Transnational Constitutionalism: International Law and European Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. 377) are contextualized through an exploration of some of the different strands of international legal doctrine that have been making use of the constitutionalist vernacular in recent years. These strands include among others, the growth in European Union-related constitutionalist discourse and the emergence of a transnational comparative legal realm at the cross-roads of the European and the international spheres; the historical lineage and the contemporary appeal of the constitutional vernacular in the field of international organizations; and the phenomenon of the fragmentation of international law along with the upholding, in reaction to that fragmentation, of a hierarchy of international legal norms. It also includes an examination of the emergence of alternative vocabularies that sustain a “fragmented/societal” model of constitutionalism on the basis of systems-theory as well as an examination of a constitutionalist value ridden perspective of the international legal order that, in mirroring recent developments, attempts to “restate” a classic teleologically conceived narrative of progress without yet leaving the realm of positivism. This article, which confronts “in fine” the “international community school” with its critics, does not aim to provide a complete deconstructed genealogy of each converging strand of doctrine that one might locate behind the current appeal of constitutionalist talk at the dawn of a post-hegemonic era. Yet it is hoped that it might serve as a reminder of the multifaceted factors that lie behind the contemporary renewal of the international constitutionalist arena and, thus, help to strengthen the latter’s potential as a benchmark for diagnosing the legitimacy deficit(s) of international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document