The persistence of partition: Boundary-making,imperialism, and international law

This article implores political geographers to engage with the sub-discipline's imperial roots in which international law was foundational. It does so by revisiting the practice of partition – defined here as an imposed boundary – which remains central to historical and current-day imperialism. This is the case, both regarding longstanding partitions, such as Northern Ireland, Kashmir, the Chagos Islands/British Indian Ocean Territory, Cyprus, Korea, and Western Sahara, and with regard to proposals to impose new partitions in Kosovo, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Palestine, and in the South China Sea. By adopting an historical perspective on the geopolitics of bordering, partition can be understood as an imposed boundary, in which the negotiators, to the extent they were consulted, were not presented with a free choice. Partitions in colonial situations only became illegal during the height of decolonization and the Cold War confrontation with the West, when the Soviet Union and Third World succeeded in modifying international law in a way that required the colonial powers to obtain the consent of the representatives of the communities whose territories they proposed to partition. As the world enters a more uncertain period, with increasing geopolitical competition, partition could make a comeback, in various guises, in which it may become necessary to pass judgment on the legality of partition, and not just its efficacy.     

The 2012 TRIP survey of international relations in Australia: one problem to rule us all

This article analyses the results of the most recent and largest cross-national survey on the international relations discipline. Completed by scholars in 20 countries, the survey covered the areas of teaching, research, foreign policy, the profession, and the relationship between policy and academia. From an Australian perspective, the key findings include the strong link between what academics teach and research; the narrowing epistemological gap between the USA and Australia; the curious pessimism of scholars on a wide range of foreign policy issues; and the ability of scholars to define research quality independently of other national settings. The most significant and alarming finding, however, concerned how the present structure of the field is undermining scholars'attempt to forge closer, more influential ties with policy makers in Canberra. In fact, it is clear from the results that what academics research and how they go about it is actually counterintuitive to this goal. The article concludes with three recommendations aimed at rectifying this problem.     

Australia,US torture and the power of international law

ABSTRACT

Australia cooperated extensively with the George W. Bush administration during the ‘war on terror.’ However, in doing so, Australia failed to condemn, and in some instances, condoned US torture and detention programs. Does Australia’s conduct demonstrate a failure of international law and human rights to constrain Australia’s actions? Although the Howard government was heavily criticised for failing to uphold human rights in the fight against terrorism, international law was not forgotten. This article argues that international law shaped Australia’s cooperation with the US. Australia strategically used international laws to legitimise its cooperation with the US in the face of evidence of US torture. International law was not dismissed to pursue national security interests but used to legitimise Australia’s security policies.     

When the rule of law met rule by the party: the conflicts between Baptist schools and the local Guomindang in Republican Suzhou

ABSTRACT

This study examines the relationship between the Guomindang (GMD) and the courts by focusing on the 1929 conflicts between the Suzhou Baptist schools and the local GMD party apparatus. The GMD regime supported the principle of rule by the party. At the local level, the GMD’s rise was often stymied by the independent judiciary whose judgments were based on the principle of the rule of law. The local party might not have been able to control the local court in the early years of the GMD regime, but it did steadily alter state-society relationships, as it could benefit from the local court’s commitment to the rule of law. For instance, the district court in Suzhou actively defended the principle of rule by the party in conflicts between Baptist schools and the local party because the GMD had made that principle the law of the land.     

Left justified: The early campaign for an international law response to Khmer Rouge crimes

In April 1979, a mission of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers made a solidarity visit to Cambodia in the immediate aftermath of Khmer Rouge rule of the country. One of the mission members, John H. E. Fried, a former advisor to the United States' military trials at Nuremberg, was moved to subsequently advocate for United Nations recognition of the then ostracised Cambodian state. The crisis of post-Khmer Rouge Cambodia, and the political justifications made by early visitors there, illuminate late Cold War cultures of progressive international law scholarship and activism through their constitutive affects and material practices. While legal investigation of Khmer Rouge crimes is now largely understood through the frame of ‘transitional justice’, this paper rejects such a framing. It argues instead for attention to Cambodia's early experiences, in which left legal activism – calling for Nuremberg's lessons to be applied to the violence perpetrated in Vietnam and Cambodia – played an important role. For scholars interested in post-1979 Cambodia, the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum historical visitor books, recently digitised, promise insight into the multiple actors, motivations and understandings of international ‘early responders’ to evidence of Khmer Rouge crimes.     

The International Affairs interview

In this the first of a regular series of interviews to appear in International Affairs , Peter Hain, Leader of the House of Commons, talks to Martha Kearney, Political Editor of BBC television's Newsnight about Britain's role in the Convention on the Future of Europe. He talks of the vision Europe can offer to the world, describing it as one of 'progressive internationalism … regulated by multilateral agreements', and the idea of Europe as a union of nation-states rather than a Brussels-based superstate. Key issues facing Europe such as enlargement, qualified majority voting and security and defence are also included in this incisive discussion.     

Explaining compliance with international law: Broadening the agenda for enquiry

Current theoretical understanding of compliance with international law is based on an assumption that international law consists of a finite set of objective, compulsory rules. This image does not match reality but the two can be reconciled through theorising international law as ideology. Such an approach subsumes questions as to why states do or do not obey law and what influence international law has on foreign policy decision making. By placing the relationship of state behaviour to international law in a broader perspective it can account for previously identified determinants of compliance and provide a basis on which to assess their relative significance. At the same time, the research agenda regarding compliance is broadened by the introduction of fresh questions.