The Limits of International Law,   ISBN:9780195314175

Customer Rating: 

Without repeating the many (!) deeply critical reviews at length, suffice it to say that this is a poorly researched, badly written and ideologically blinkered polemic. The authors proceed from a simplistic conception of international law to a series of methodologically flawed case studies to draw unsupported conclusions. In particular, while claiming to advance a more rigorous and empirically-based analytical approach to questions of compliance, the authors barely address any of the substantial empirical compliance literature that has developed over the past decade: readers will, for example, look in vain for any reference to Oran Young, Benedict Kingsbury, Michael Byers or other serious scholars who have actually managed to advance more rigorous approaches.

Customer Rating: 

What is international law? Most international lawyers will tell you that there are principles of international legality that are larger than any specific treaty and these principles of legality bind states, sometimes even against their will; there is something called customary international law which is international law that evolved in a decentralized fashion as a matter of custom; and there are human rights norms that are part of customary international law and bind states even if those states never explicitly agreed to them.

In this short, sharp book, Jack Goldmsith and Eric Posner explain why this is nonsense. International law, they argue, is a part of international politics. States enter into treaties and other international legal institutions when doing so serves their interests. Any cooperation among states is a byproduct of that rational act. On the whole, the Goldsmith and Posner are quite convincing.

The theory of the book is, nevertheless, incomplete without a discussion of how nations actually identify and develop their interests in the first place. On this, the authors are silent. Why does Britain feel it is in its interest to sign the Kyoto Protocol? Why do totalitarian regimes sign human rights treaties? Why enter into international agreements at all? This book lacks a theory that explains or predicts the amount of international law. If there is no moral or legal obligation to obey international law, is there even such a thing as international law?

Customer Rating: 

I was very disappointed with this book. While claiming to be an academic book, the text reads more like a neconservative, ideological condemnation of international law. The authors seem to be denying a substantial body of evidence, and that is not an issue if they had made their arguements using case study or better yet strong empirical study. I actually tend to agree with many of their points, but they are really not the first ones who are making these arguements. A whole school of thought in international relations has made these arguements for decades, and frankly with much more clarity than this book and highly more complex and fine logic.

The authors should have also recognized that this is a contentious issue in international relations and international law. If you come out with strong claims like this, you better back your ideas with fine reasoning (which the book lacks) and evidence. Otherwise, as I believe will be the case with this book, your book will end up in the back stacks of university libraries after a while.