Book Review: Modern Law of Nations – An Introduction

The movement towards internationalism has had two phases: one, a purported reform in international law designed to substitute subordination for co-ordination, with a non-existent police force as the enforcer of law; and, two, the first having been frustrated, to create a super-state which shall prevail by overwhelming power against any state. This book represents the first phase. The eight chapters, which do not seem to have any relation to each other, have to a large extent appeared before in the form of periodical articles, mostly in the American Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs. The author has been a middle of the road man heretofore, concerned with defending international law against modern innovations. In this book, however, he assumes that the innovations, principally the United Nations Charter, has or will become law in due time. As contrasted with his teachers, Mr. Jessup shows a liking for the new fashions. The League of Nations died some years ago. It is surprising that it is cited as if it still existed. The author molds international law to accommodate what he thinks he sees. He thinks he sees a community of nations which will apply the new law. The antics of Soviet Russia seem to render the supposed community a dream. The author\u27s major postulates of the individual as a source and subject of international law and the interdependence of states seem belied by the event. The United Nations looks as if it is about to die. As we go to press, seventeen senators are reported to have introduced a resolution looking to the fundamental revision of UN. The Military Staff Committee seems unable to agree on a formula by which troops or a UN commission are to be sent to the countries surrounding Greece, to Palestine and to Korea to enforce the judgment of UN. It may be, of course, that Russia will step out and not stymie the whole show by her veto, but this seems unlikely and with her departure a new war is likely to begin. It is true that war is now made more difficult, but not by the Charter. War has now become so terrible that the victor is liable to suffer as much as the vanquished. That is the one ground for hope that war may abolish itself