Bilder 1994

American Society of International Law
Review
Author(s): Richard B. Bilder and Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley
Review by: Richard B. Bilder and Anne-Marie Slaughter Burley
Source: The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 88, No. 3 (Jul., 1994), pp. 550-551
Published by: American Society of International Law
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2203726
Accessed: 23-10-2015 08:59 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
American Society of International Law is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American
Journal of International Law.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.174.255.116 on Fri, 23 Oct 2015 08:59:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
EDITED BY RICHARD B. BILDER
InternationalRelationsTheory:New Norma- tive theory of international relations,"

tive Approaches.By Chris Brown. New Brownuses the dichotomyof cosmopolitan-
York: Columbia UniversityPress, 1992. ism versus communitarianismas a lens to
Pp. vii, 255. Indexes. $50, cloth; $16.50, group and classifytheoristsfromHobbes to
paper. Habermas. Synthetically, the book is a tour
de force. The dichotomyis artificial,but
Chris Brown has writtena very useful not false,and in Brown's hands it is heuris-
book. In an age in whichinternationalrela- ticallyvaluable. It turnson "the moralvalue
tions theoristshave definedthe advance of to be credited to particularisticpolitical
theirdisciplineas the progressiveseparation
collectivitiesas againsthumanityas a whole
of the study of the internationalsystem or the claims of individualhuman beings"
fromtraditionalpolitical science and have
(p. 12).
developed for thispurpose a unique set of Part I canvasses three hundred years of
assumptionsanalogous to economic theo- moral philosophy, social philosophy and
rists' presupposition of economic man, ethics as the necessary background and
Brownargues forthe reconnectionof inter- foundationof intemationalrelationstheory.
national relations theory to mainstream The paradigms of cosmopolitanismversus
politicaltheory.Indeed, he blames thisiso- communitarianism begin withKant and He-
lation from political theory,stronglyem- gel, respectively.Brown does an admirable
phasized in the "English school" of inter- job, not only of summarizingthe specific
national theoristsby MartinWightand his work of these two philosophers as it per-
followers,formuch of the povertyof inter- tains to internationalrelations,but also of
nationalrelationstheory.'"[T]he theoryof locating that work in the larger corpus of
internationalrelations,"he claims,"is not a thoughton subjectsfrommoralsto history.
long-lost,newlyinvigoratedtwinof political He is particularlystrongon Kant, arguing
theorybut an integralpart of the latterdis- persuasively that "Kant's international
course" (p. 6). His book is devoted to sup- theoryis a response to the requirementsof
portingthisclaim. his critical philosophy taken as a whole,"
In addition, as his title suggests,Brown and tracingKant's thinkingfrom his con-
wishesto reestablishnormativetheory.This cern withthe moral developmentof the in-
aim cuts againstthe grainof much contem- dividual to his concept of the state as pro-
poraryAmericanpoliticalscience but offers vidingthe necessaryenvironmentfor such
a strongbridge to internationallaw. He ac- development,and to his furtherconclusion
complishesboth these goals, in the firstin- thatwar mustbe abolished in order forthe
stance by redefiningpolitical theoryitself, stateto surviveand flourish.Cosmopolitan-
not as "speculation about the state," from ism does not stop with Kant, however.
which perspectiveinternationaltheorybe- Brown also offersa utilitarianaccount of
comes speculation about the system of cosmopolitanismdrawn from the work of
states,but as "the search forjustice in soci- Bentham.Both these thinkers,regardlessof
ety" (pp. 6-7). Justice knows no borders. their differencesin other respects,posit a
Society can mean not only a society of world in which individual values, be they
states,but also a global societyof individ- based on moralimperativeor maximumutil-
uals. ity,are preeminent.In contrast,the com-
To "describe, annotate and evaluate the munitarianresponserunsfromRousseau to
main debates generatedby the new norma- Hegel to Mill, all of whom findthe fullde-
velopmentof the individualto be insepara-
1 MARTIN WRIGHT, POWER POLITICS (2d ed. ble from identificationwith and preserva-
1978). tion of the state,and, ultimately,of the na-
550
1994] BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES 551
tion. Brown notes, "[T]hat the world lead him to overlook recognized interna-
divides naturallyinto nations, that nations tional relationstheoristswhose workcould
are the source of value for human beings usefullybe distilled.
and should thereforebe the basis forpoliti- Overall,Brown'sbook is valuable as a ref-
cal organisation . . . is now firmlyembed- erence and as a studenttext.His summaries
ded in the settled norms of the interna- are admirablyclear and concise, drawing
tional system"(p. 71). heavilyon secondary sources to explicate
Brown termspart II the "heartland"- a and interpretthe great political philoso-
reviewof contributorsto the "new norma- phers.The summariesat the beginningand
tive internationalrelationstheory." He in- end of each chapter are sometimesexces-
cludes such scholars as Michael Walzer, sive; forthe mostpart,however,the exposi-
Thomas Nagel, Charles Beitz,TerryNardin, tion is satisfyingly self-conscious-admit-
BryanBarry,John Rawls and Michael San- tingoversimplification butjustifyingit. The
del. In the midstof thissurvey,Brownshifts author has a giftfor aphorism."[W]ar and
fromthe general to the specific,organizing peace," he asserts,"is, at least in the twen-
the cosmopolitan-communitariandebate tiethcentury,one of those issues where de-
around specifictopics. Chapter 5 examines cent opinion is all on one side of an argu-
the question of the moral value to be as- ment that,as a result,never actuallytakes
signedto stateautonomy;chapter6 looks at place" (pp. 129-30).
the ethics of interstate violence; and This is not a book that offersanswers.
chapter 7 tackles theoriesof justice. Each Brown prefersto pose questions and line
of these chapterscontinuesto use the cos- up authorson eitherside. His relentlesscat-
mopolitan-communitarianheuristic. High egorizationneverthelessachieveshis goal of
points include the summaryof RobertJack- reconnectinginternationalrelationstheory
son's questioning of the traditionaldefini- withmainstreampoliticaltheoryand philos-
tion of state sovereigntyin his work on ophy. In thisregard,he joins legal scholars
"quasi-states"-states thatpossess external such as Lea Brilmayer,2Fernando Teson3
sovereigntyby courtesyof the recognition and Thomas Franck4in adapting the work
grantedby otherstates,but not the internal of such philosophers as Kant, Rawls and
sovereigntythat is purportedlya prerequi- Dworkin to the internationalrealm. Rawls
site for that recognition;the recapitulation himselfrecentlyrejoined thisdebate witha
of the debate between Michael Walzer and lecture on "the law of peoples."5 I am not
his criticsover his strongdefenseof the in- convinced that Brown will persuade many
tegrityof the nation-statein thewake of the politicalscientists,on eitherside of the At-
VietnamWar; and the presentationof Peter lantic,of the meritsof his argument.Inter-
Singer's radical utilitarianappeal to the national lawyersseeking new stimulusfor
world's citizens to combat global famine theorybuilding,however,willfindmuch to
and poverty through individual action. praise.
Rawls, Beitz and Sandel also receivea thor-
ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER BURLEY
ough airing on issues of internationaldis-
Board of Editors
tributive justice.
The book's weakestpart is part III, a re-
viewof theworkof postmodernists and criti- 2 LEA BRILMAYER, JUSTIFYING INTERNATIONAL
cal theorists.Habermas and Rorty,on the
ACTS (1989).
one hand, and Foucault and Parfit,on the
3Fernando R. Teson, The Kantian Theory of
other, sit uneasily in Brown's categories. InternationalLaw, 92 COLUM. L. REV. 53 (1992).
His summarieshere are less sure-footed,his 4THOMAS M. FRANCK, THE POWER OF LEGITI-
classificationsmore strained. Further, he MACY AMONG NATIONS (1 990).
omits discussion of the work of contempo- 5John Rawls, The Law of Peoples, in ON Hu-
raryAmerican "critical" internationalrela- MAN RIGHTS 41 (Stephen Shute & Susan L. Hur-
tionstheoristssuch as RichardAshley,Paul- ley eds., 1993).
ine Rosenau, James der Derian and Alex
Wendt. His focus on domesticpoliticalphi-
losophers and his determinationto recast
them as international relations theorists

Bilder 1994

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bilder 1994

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bilder 1994

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

American Society of International Law

InternationalRelationsTheory:New Norma- tive theory of international relations,"

You might also like