RELEVANCE OF

INTERNATIONAL LAW IN
PRESENT CONTEXT
>Introduction

In this modern age the world has greatly shrunk as a result of scientific and technological developments
drastically. As a consequence events in one part of the world have an immediate impact on the rest of the
world. For this we can take an example of global economic or financial crisis which started in America and its
impact was seen by the whole world including India, China and many other developed and developing
countries. It resulted in the collapse of large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments
and downturns in stock markets around the world.

Similarly there are other issues such as maintenance of peace, security and sovereignty of states, Environment
degradation, Terrorism, Piracy, Air and Space law, Law of seas, Airplane Hijacking, International trade and
commerce and disputes related thereto, Economic-Social and Cultural developments of states, promotion,
protection of Human Rights and International trade and business etc. These issues are global in nature and
cannot be confined to and solved within territorial or political boundaries. Therefore, States maintain regular
relations with other states because a modern State cannot lead an isolated life in the present context of world
affairs. The more a State is civilized and perfect in its organization, the greater and more familiar shall be its
intercourse with other States. This leads to that a Government of a State must not only conduct its internal
affairs but also regulate its conduct towards the Governments and citizens of other States.

The harmony in political ideas, art and literature, scientific discovery, the exchange of embassy for the purpose
of carrying on International intercourse and commerce all tends to knit States together in a social bond.
Wendell Willkie's conception of "One World" is no more a wishful thinking of a vain politician, but a hard
reality and a plain truth, which cannot be ignored. Normally the inhabitants of one country frequently visit the
territory of another, and no State can with any degree of practicability or effectiveness close its frontiers so as
to prevent its citizens from travelling abroad or to exclude foreigners from its own territory. The need of
foreign trade further necessitates the maintenance of relations with other States.

Just as men could not live together in a society without laws and customs to regulate their actions, so States
could not have mutual intercourse without usages and conventions to regulate their conduct. International Law
impinges on state sovereignty by creating new structures for regulating relations across international
boundaries. International Law and International Norms limits the state sovereignty in another way. They
create principles for governing international relations that compete with the core realist principles of
sovereignty and anarchy. International Law derives not from actions of any legislative branch or other central
authority, but from traditions and agreements signed by states. It also differs in the difficulty of enforcement,
which depends not on the power and authority of central government but on reciprocity, collective action and
international norms.
Without International laws and customs, it is impossible for states to maintain relations on the basis of peace,
harmony and mutual co-operation. Rather, then the rule 'might is right' will prevail that would be destructive
for the global peace and humanity.

>WHAT IS INTERNATIONAL LAW?

Body of rules, norms, and standards that apply between sovereign states and other entities that are legally
recognized as international actors. The term international law was coined by the English philosopher Jeremy
Bentham. Important elements of international law include sovereignty, recognition (which allows a country to
honour the claims of another), consent (which allows for modifications in international agreements to fit the
customs of a country), freedom of the high seas, self-defense (which ensures that measures may be taken
against illegal acts committed against a sovereign country), freedom of commerce, and protection of nationals
abroad.

In other words International law is the body of rules that governs the legal relations among international
subjects. Earlier states were the only subjects of international law but now the position has changed gradually
and now individuals, international organizations and non-state entities are also treated as subjects, which were
earlier treated as objects of international law.

Why Do All States, Weak and Strong, Mostly Obey International Law?

To Comply, or not to Comply, That is the Question

All states in the contemporary world, including great powers, are compelled to justify their behaviour
according to legal rules and accepted norms. This essay will analyse the extent to which states comply and the
reasons for their compliance. Essentially, the extent to which states follow their international obligations has
developed over the past 400 years. From a historical perspective, international obligations and accepted norms
were founded following two key developments in European history. In 1648, the Treaty of Westphalia ended
the Thirty Years’ War by acknowledging the sovereign authority of various European princes. This event
marked the advent of traditional international law, based on principles of territoriality and state autonomy.
Then in 1945, again following major wars initiated in Europe, states began to integrate on a global scale. The
UN Charter became the international framework for which norms of sovereignty and non-intervention were
enshrined. Now, as a result of modern technology, communication, transport, and more, the evolving process
of Globalisation, “The internationalization of the world”, has provided an opportunity for international law and
accepted norms to reach every corner of the globe.

However, the development of international law and accepted norms has not compelled states to comply all the
time. Instead, the trend over the past 400 years has shown that states have been mostly compelled to justify
their behavior according to legal rules and accepted norms. The emphasis on mostly should be stressed. Even
though the UN Charter does not permit violating sovereignty through the use of aggression, the extent to which
states follow their international obligations varies. Louis Henkin’s book, How Nations Behave, articulates the
extent of compliance.[4] He said, “Almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and
almost all of their obligations almost all the time”.[5] As such, the trend in contemporary international
relations is that war remains possible, but it is much less acceptable now than it was a century or even half a
century ago.[6] The benefit of the trend is that almost full compliance is said to lead states into a pattern of
obedience and predictable behaviour.[7] Therefore, conflict only arises when countries fail to comply.
States attempt to manage the friction with ongoing compliance through the principle of pacta sunt servanda –
the adherence to agreements.[8] Over time, such agreements to norms and treaties have diminished
sovereignty, increased international institutions, given rise to non-state actors, and rapidly developed the
contemporary customary and treaty based rules system.[9] The evolution of the dispute-settlement procedures
of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the
establishment of numerous global treaties illustrate states agreeing voluntarily to give up a portion of their
sovereignty.

INTERNAL RELATIONS
International relations attempts to explain the interactions of states in the global interstate system, and
it also attempts to explain the interactions of others whose behavior originates within one country and
is targeted toward members of other countries. In short, the study of international relations is an
attempt to explain behavior that occurs across the boundaries of states, the broader relationships of
which such behavior is a part, and the institutions (private, state, nongovernmental, and
intergovernmental) that oversee those interactions. Explanations of that behavior may be sought at any
level of human aggregation. Some look to psychological and social-psychological understandings of why
foreign policymakers act as they do. Others investigate institutional processes and politics as factors
contributing to the externally directed goals and behavior of states. Alternatively, explanations may be
found in the relationships between and among the participants (for example, balance of power), in the
intergovernmental arrangements among states (for example, collective security), in the activities of
multinational corporations (for example, the distribution of wealth), or in the distribution of power and
control in the world as a single system.