JHIL Journal
of the History of International Law
Call for
engaged listeners
Deadline: 30 September 2018
“Politics and the histories of international
law”
Conference organised by the
Journal of
the History of International Law (JHIL)
Heidelberg, 15 – 16 February 2019
On 15 and 16 February 2019, an
international conference will be held at the Max Planck Institute for
International Law in Heidelberg, Germany, under the auspices of the Journal of the History of
International
Law. Selected scholars will present and discuss their papers in different
parallel panels (see draft programme attached). The aim is to publish these
papers (upon peer review) in a focus issue on ‘Politics and the Histories of
International Law’ in the journal.
‘L’histoire
n’est pas une religion. L’historien n’accepte aucun dogme, ne respecte aucun
interdit, ne connaît pas de tabous. Il peut être dérangeant’
(Liberté
pour l’histoire, 2005)
Almost all scholarship on
international law and its history has political implications. Some
say that international legal scholarship is inevitably ideological in
nature and that its findings depend on concealed political preferences. Put
differently, legal scholarship could be nothing more than the pseudo-objective
defence of ruling ideologies. Most famously, Hans Kelsen had denounced a
‘tendency wide-spread among writers on international law’ to produce ‘political
ideology’. Kelsen sought to escape this by writing books of a ‘purely juristic
character’ (Principles of International
Law, 2nd ed. 1967, ix). In his foreword to the commentary on the UN Charter
of 1950, he stressed that ‘separation of
law from politics in the presentation of national or international problems
is possible’ (The Law of the United
Nations, 1950, viii).
Many nowadays doubt that purging
international legal scholarship of politics would work. Martti Koskenniemi in
2004 put this as follows: ‘The choice is not between law and politics, but
between one politics of law, and another. Everything is at stake, but not for
everyone’ (EJIL 16 (2005), 123).
So which factors ‘politicise’
international legal scholarship? The first factor is that the object under
investigation is itself a political matter. International law has throughout
its history been political, because its content depends on the political power
of the parties negotiating the treaties, and because it transports political
values.
Scholars themselves cannot completely avoid being
more or less political actors, because their value judgements, which are
inescapable, often carry political implications. However, an important
difference between doing scholarship and doing politics lies in the authors’
main intention: It is, ideal-typically, not the primary purpose of scholarship
to make politics and unbounded evaluation but to generate knowledge − which
could then be used politically, by the author herself or by others. Along this
line, most scholars of history seek to uncover various aspects of past events
and debates and to contextualise them, thereby realising a modicum of
objectivity and neutrality. Some consciously try to avoid judgment, while others are more prone to
judging deliberately and to employing historical insights in contemporary
political debates.
Research on the history of
international law is not only inherently political but moreover specifically
‘risk-prone’. Writing on topics such as genocide, state of exception, failed
states, humanitarian intervention, asymmetrical war, or cyber-attacks is especially
liable to being used and abused by participants in political controversies. In
fact, when it comes to writing history, the fight over master narratives is
especially fierce, among governments, in different academic camps, and between
governments and academics. The notorious example are memory laws which
consecrate specific views on atrocities of the past (especially genocidal
massacres) and which sometimes additionally criminalise the denial of those
atrocities. These attempts to close historical debates by law has been
criticised by historians, most famously in the petition ‘Liberté pour
l‘histoire’ by French historians reacting against various French memory
laws.
To conclude, the interpretations
of historical events are almost inescapably political, and potentially have the
power to shape international relations: ‘On résiste à l’invasion des armées; on
ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées’ (Victor Hugo, Histoire d’un crime, 1877/2009, 639). It is against this background
that the rights and responsibilities of those researching on the history of
international law should be seen.
The conference will be restricted to
panellists and to a limited number of
engaged listeners.
If you are interested in
participating in the audience (not as a speaker) and thus contribute to our
discussion, please send an application with a short motivation letter explaining your interest in the conference and
current research interests (maximum 400 words) along with your CV to the managing editor of the JHIL
at conf.jhil.2019@mpil.de.
The deadline for applications is 30 September 2018. Applications
arriving after this date will not be taken into consideration. Successful
applicants will be notified until the end of October 2018.
Participation is free of charge, but
at your own expense. Please note that travel
and accommodation costs cannot be covered by the organizers. Admitted
engaged listeners must secure their own accommodation and are advised to do
this early.
The conference will last from Friday
morning, 15 February to Saturday noon, 16 February 2019. It will start with an
informal get-together of speakers and engaged listeners on Thursday evening, 14
February 2019.
Venue:
Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and Public International Law,
Im Neuenheimer Feld 535, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
For updated technical information on
the conference see
Anne Peters and Raphael Schäfer
Contact: conf.jhil.2019@mpil.de
19 July 2018
