In the late 20th century, it has become widely accepted that States need to cooperate in order to pursue effectively their interests within the increasingly interdependent world order. At the same time, the principle of sovereignty is still often invoked as a claim for independence and a justification for non-cooperation. This book goes beyond that traditional understanding to develop a new theory which holds that cooperation between States is not an independent principle supplementing State sovereignty or even a counterweight to State sovereignty. Rather, cooperation should be conceived an element of the very notion of sovereignty itself. Sovereignty is not a negative principle meaning merely State independence and freedom, but it also inherently includes a positive element which stresses a State's innate membership in the international community and its authority, its responsibility, its duty to participate actively in that community. In short, sovereignty not only means independence, it also means a responsibility to cooperate. The first part of the book traces the history of the principle of sovereignty from the theories of Grotius and Francisco de Vitoria to the modern understanding of the principle in the light of the United Nations system. The second part of the book poses challenges to the traditional concept of sovereignty in the light of the 20th century interdependence, and the third part goes on to formulate a new theory which takes into account the principles of customary law and treaty law. The conclusions drawn on by the author are refreshing, but may also be controversial, and this book will most definitely contribute to the discussion and development of the principle of sovereignty in international law.

Challenging the myth that the federal government exercises exclusive control over U.S. foreign-policymaking, Michael J. Glennon and Robert D. Sloane propose that we recognize the prominent role that states and cities now play in that realm. Foreign Affairs Federalism provides the first comprehensive study of the constitutional law and practice of federalism in the conduct of U.S. foreign relations. It could hardly be timelier. States and cities recently have limited greenhouse gas emissions, declared nuclear free zones and sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants, established thousands of sister-city relationships, set up informal diplomatic offices abroad, and sanctioned oppressive foreign governments. Exploring the implications of these and other initiatives, this book argues that the national interest cannot be advanced internationally by Washington alone. Glennon and Sloane examine in detail the considerable foreign affairs powers retained by the states under the Constitution and question the need for Congress or the president to step in to provide "one voice" in foreign affairs. They present concrete, realistic ways that the courts can update antiquated federalism precepts and untangle interwoven strands of international law, federal law, and state law. The result is a lucid, incisive, and up-to-date analysis of the rules that empower-and limit-states and cities abroad.

Has the concept of sovereignty outlived its usefulness? Social order requires a sovereign: an actor with unlimited, undivided, and unaccountable authority. Or so the classic theory says. But without noticing, we’ve gutted the theory. Constitutionalism limits state authority. Federalism divides it. The rule of law holds it accountable. In vivid historical detail—with millions tortured and slaughtered in Europe, a king put on trial for his life, journalists groaning at idiotic complaints about the League of Nations, and much more—Don Herzog charts both the political struggles that forged sovereignty and the ones that undid it. He argues that it’s no longer a helpful guide to our legal and political problems, but a pernicious bit of confusion. It’s time, past time, to retire sovereignty.

Publisher description

Globalisation and the increasing role of international financial institutions have led many to question the continued viability of the sovereign state. This text disagrees, arguing that states have never been as sovereign as some have supposed.

Available Open Access under CC-BY-NC licence. Examining how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) has responded to external threats over the past 50 years, this book provides a compelling account of regional state actions and foreign policy in the face of potential sovereignty violation. The author draws on a large amount of previously unanalysed material, including declassified government documents and WikiLeaks cables, to examine four key cases since 1975. Taking into account state interests and the role of external powers, the author develops the ‘vanguard state theory’ to explain ASEAN state responses to sovereignty violation, which, it is argued, has universal applicability and explanatory power.

Who actually controls the Northwest Passage? Who owns the trillions of dollars of oil and gas beneath the Arctic Ocean? Which territorial claims will prevail, and why — those of the United States, Russia, Canada, or the Nordic nations? And, in an age of rapid climate change, how do we protect the fragile Arctic environment while seizing the economic opportunities presented by the rapidly melting sea-ice? Michael Byers, a leading Arctic expert and international lawyer clearly and concisely explains the sometimes contradictory rules governing the division and protection of the Arctic and the disputes over the region that still need to be resolved. What emerges is a vision for the Arctic in which cooperation, not conflict, prevails and where the sovereignty of individual nations is exercised for the benefit of all. This insightful little book is an informed primer for today's most pressing territorial issue.