dustyduck's review against another edition
5.0
An incisive examination of international law and how its institutions and norms have often been neo-imperial in nature. Anghie's examination of resource concessions brilliantly illustrates how sovereignty has been constructed differently for Third World, decolonized states: private economic relations come to subsume formal equality and the economic and mineral rights of states, in coming to posit that international, universal legal systems (=Western legal systems) is the only system suitable for less developed countries; their sovereignty is only invoked in the context of legitimizing concessions given to colonial powers. Law, too often, positions itself as agnostic, even neutral to historical contingencies but what this indifference really amounts to is an injustice. Still, the focus on institutions suggests that international law's effect on perpetuating this hierarchy and dependency (and vulnerability to unilateral interventions, in a post-9/11 world) for the 'Third World' arises out of the disproportionate influence over institutions wielded by Western (and often neo-imperial) states.
Anghie's historical account has great normative significance, in addition to its evaluative significance that the international order enacted by international law is one that perpetuates hierarchies and inequalities. I recommend reading him alongside Mark Mazower's books- if this is about the intellectual history of law (and implicitly about political developments), then Mazower focuses on the inverse relationship.
Anghie's historical account has great normative significance, in addition to its evaluative significance that the international order enacted by international law is one that perpetuates hierarchies and inequalities. I recommend reading him alongside Mark Mazower's books- if this is about the intellectual history of law (and implicitly about political developments), then Mazower focuses on the inverse relationship.
More...