Trump and Musk share a contempt for international law. They are not alone. There is a long line of self-proclaimed “realists” in intentional relations who ask “Where’s the police to enforce this so-called law?” as if it’s a killer objection. Contracts are not enforced by the police except as a last resort when one of the parties is in contempt of court.
I have news for Messrs Trump and Musk. If international law does not exist, neither does the United Stares.
In common with many other countries emerging from successful rebellions or independence movements, the USA has a heroic foundation myth in which the new nation created itself by a mutual pact of defiance and self-defence. The key documents in the American myth are the Declaration of Independence (1776), the Articles of Confederation (1777), and the Constitution of 1787. (The Reconstruction Amendments (1865 to 1870) are as much a source of division as of common celebration). The myth is not false; these were key steps in the construction of the new state on startlingly innovative lines.
But they were not all the story. If you ask the question “Where exactly are these United States you speak of?”, the three documents are silent, beyond their lists of signatories. One essential, defining, feature of a state is clear borders. Where do you find them? In treaties with other states. For the USA, this started with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, not only with the former colonial power, Britain, but also with France and Spain. Later border treaties involved Mexico and Russia as well.
Recognition of borders is recognition of statehood by other members of the community of states. These treaties – necessarily involving other state partners - are part of the corpus of international law. Without them, you aren’t a proper state. Ask the Kurds: they have run their own territory for decades, with armed forces, courts, government institutions, and so on, but as yet nobody recognizes their statehood.
International law predates the existence of the United States. Most old treaties are dead: SFIK no treaty between Rome and Parthia has any relevance today. But a different Treaty of Paris in 1247 bought to an end a long war between England and France. It confirmed the cession to rhe Kingdom of France of the continental territories on the Duchy of Normandy - and the retention by the King of England, as vestigial Duke of Normandy, of the Channel Islands. Jersey and Guernsey cite the treaty in arguments resisting encroachment by London on their status as tax havens and independent jurisdictions, and it comes up in disputes with France over maritime exclusion zones for fishing and wind farms. The continuing validity of the treaty has survived the French Revolution and the Fifth Republic, which is the legal successor to the French monarchy.
There is more controversy over the cession of Gibraltar to Britain by the Peace of Utrecht (1713). On he other side of the Straits, Morocco would like Ceuta and Melilla back too, but again, fifteenth-century peace treaties stand in the way. It’s just as well that parchment is very long-lived.
Do you have any thoughts on Mariana Mazzucato's work? Do you have any thoughts on her conception of public-private partnerships in contrast with your own perception of neoliberal public-private partnerships? Thank you for your time.
The Cour des Comptes is SFIK the oldest institution of public audit anywhere, and still one of the toughest. Refounded by Napoleon in 1807, it is one of the few French public institutions surviving from the ancien regime. Its motto could be “Hanging Ministers of Finance since 1315”, when Philippe le Bel’s capable but unpopular finance aide Enguerrand de Marigny was executed on the multi-storey Paris gibbet at Montfaucon, now Montmartre. (In fact de Marigny successfully defended himself against the charge of peculation His enemy Robert of Artois then cooked up a bogus charge of witchcraft. Perhaps this could be revived for the crypto scam.)
Ah, the nuclear fans will say, EPRs are huge and over-complicared dinosaurs (true). SMRs are quite different and are guaranteed to come in on time and in budget, promise. Sure. Just as the King of France can be counted on to protect his loyal servants from the mob.
aus.social or Bluesky @johnquiggin.bsky.social get running commentary, or wait for my next Substack post, which should address this. ShorterJQ: reciprocal tariffs are not enough - Canada and Mexico need to hit back hard, breaking lots of norms along the way
Offbeat but interesting analogy between MAGA and Mao's Cultural Revolution:
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/02/08/science-purge-is-part-of-united-states-echoing-of-maos-cultural-revolution/
I say: don't forget Ivan the Terrible and his oprichniki! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oprichnina
On the existence of international law
Trump and Musk share a contempt for international law. They are not alone. There is a long line of self-proclaimed “realists” in intentional relations who ask “Where’s the police to enforce this so-called law?” as if it’s a killer objection. Contracts are not enforced by the police except as a last resort when one of the parties is in contempt of court.
I have news for Messrs Trump and Musk. If international law does not exist, neither does the United Stares.
In common with many other countries emerging from successful rebellions or independence movements, the USA has a heroic foundation myth in which the new nation created itself by a mutual pact of defiance and self-defence. The key documents in the American myth are the Declaration of Independence (1776), the Articles of Confederation (1777), and the Constitution of 1787. (The Reconstruction Amendments (1865 to 1870) are as much a source of division as of common celebration). The myth is not false; these were key steps in the construction of the new state on startlingly innovative lines.
But they were not all the story. If you ask the question “Where exactly are these United States you speak of?”, the three documents are silent, beyond their lists of signatories. One essential, defining, feature of a state is clear borders. Where do you find them? In treaties with other states. For the USA, this started with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, not only with the former colonial power, Britain, but also with France and Spain. Later border treaties involved Mexico and Russia as well.
Recognition of borders is recognition of statehood by other members of the community of states. These treaties – necessarily involving other state partners - are part of the corpus of international law. Without them, you aren’t a proper state. Ask the Kurds: they have run their own territory for decades, with armed forces, courts, government institutions, and so on, but as yet nobody recognizes their statehood.
International law predates the existence of the United States. Most old treaties are dead: SFIK no treaty between Rome and Parthia has any relevance today. But a different Treaty of Paris in 1247 bought to an end a long war between England and France. It confirmed the cession to rhe Kingdom of France of the continental territories on the Duchy of Normandy - and the retention by the King of England, as vestigial Duke of Normandy, of the Channel Islands. Jersey and Guernsey cite the treaty in arguments resisting encroachment by London on their status as tax havens and independent jurisdictions, and it comes up in disputes with France over maritime exclusion zones for fishing and wind farms. The continuing validity of the treaty has survived the French Revolution and the Fifth Republic, which is the legal successor to the French monarchy.
There is more controversy over the cession of Gibraltar to Britain by the Peace of Utrecht (1713). On he other side of the Straits, Morocco would like Ceuta and Melilla back too, but again, fifteenth-century peace treaties stand in the way. It’s just as well that parchment is very long-lived.
Hi John,
Do you have any thoughts on Mariana Mazzucato's work? Do you have any thoughts on her conception of public-private partnerships in contrast with your own perception of neoliberal public-private partnerships? Thank you for your time.
EPR reactors
The French Cour des Comptes has published an update report on the EPR reactors being built, slowly and at enormous cost, by French public utility EDF. Summary in French https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2025-01/20250114-synthese-La-filiere-EPR--une-dynamique-nouvelle-des-risques-persistants_0.pdf , full report in French https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2025-01/20250114-La-filiere-EPR%20-une-dynamique-nouvelle-des-risques-persistants_0.pdf . One of the reactors is in England, Hinkley Point C. Another is planned, Sizewell C. Unsurprisingly the Cour advises against EDF being sucked deeper into this deluded boondoggle.
The Cour des Comptes is SFIK the oldest institution of public audit anywhere, and still one of the toughest. Refounded by Napoleon in 1807, it is one of the few French public institutions surviving from the ancien regime. Its motto could be “Hanging Ministers of Finance since 1315”, when Philippe le Bel’s capable but unpopular finance aide Enguerrand de Marigny was executed on the multi-storey Paris gibbet at Montfaucon, now Montmartre. (In fact de Marigny successfully defended himself against the charge of peculation His enemy Robert of Artois then cooked up a bogus charge of witchcraft. Perhaps this could be revived for the crypto scam.)
Ah, the nuclear fans will say, EPRs are huge and over-complicared dinosaurs (true). SMRs are quite different and are guaranteed to come in on time and in budget, promise. Sure. Just as the King of France can be counted on to protect his loyal servants from the mob.
Yes, I can't see Sizewell C going ahead after this, especially given that EDF is supposedly going to construct a bunch of reactors in France.
Hi John, What are your thoughts on the Canadian reaction to Trump tariffs?
You can follow me on Mastodon @johnquiggin
aus.social or Bluesky @johnquiggin.bsky.social get running commentary, or wait for my next Substack post, which should address this. ShorterJQ: reciprocal tariffs are not enough - Canada and Mexico need to hit back hard, breaking lots of norms along the way