This book explores the relationship between the “human constant” (Jen) of the four large-scale civilizational societies—China, the USA, Japan, and India—and their international behavior, response patterns, and interaction with the international system. The book analyzes the characteristics and limitations of the current international system, as well as the way it is related to the Western type of “human constant”. It also analyzes the challenges facing China in its integration into the international system. This book aims to explore international relations from the combined psychological and cultural perspective. The key concept of this book is “Jen”, which contains a distinct Chinese cultural experience, into the theory of international relations. Unlike other IR books to treat state as the main political actor, the book analyzes both the political aspects of state as an “organizational entity” and its civilizational aspects as a “civilizational entity”; hence, it proposes a new ontology of international relations. By integrating the concept of “Jen” based on the unique Chinese cultural experience into the theory of international relations, the book reveals the interactive nature of relationship between the international system and “human constant”. The book explains the causal relationship between state’s behavior and its “human constant”, analyzes the cultural characteristics of state actors and the international system, and tries to provide a new theoretical framework for understanding culture and modernity.

This title was first published in 1977. A wide-ranging series of carefully prepared translations of books published in China since 1949, each with an extended introduction by a western scholar.

It is commonly believed that international law originated in relations among European states that respected one another as free and equal. In fact, as Jennifer Pitts shows, international law was forged at least as much through Europeans’ domineering relations with non-European states and empires, leaving a legacy still visible in the unequal structures of today’s international order. Pitts focuses on the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the great age of imperial expansion, as European intellectuals and administrators worked to establish and justify laws to govern emerging relationships with non-Europeans. Relying on military and commercial dominance, European powers dictated their own terms on the basis of their own norms and interests. Despite claims that the law of nations was a universal system rooted in the values of equality and reciprocity, the laws that came to govern the world were parochial and deeply entangled in imperialism. Legal authorities, including Emer de Vattel, John Westlake, and Henry Wheaton, were key figures in these developments. But ordinary diplomats, colonial administrators, and journalists played their part too, as did some of the greatest political thinkers of the time, among them Montesquieu and John Stuart Mill. Against this growing consensus, however, dissident voices as prominent as Edmund Burke insisted that European states had extensive legal obligations abroad that ought not to be ignored. These critics, Pitts shows, provide valuable resources for scrutiny of the political, economic, and legal inequalities that continue to afflict global affairs.

States get involved in international affairs either directly or through their instrumentalities. The activities of these instrumentalities raise many issues, two of which have given rise to significant recent developments both in arbitral and domestic case law. The first is whether and under what conditions a State may be held liable for the conduct of such instrumentalities on the basis of an investment treaty. This issue will be the subject of a systematic survey of ICSID and ICC case law and that of other arbitral tribunals so as to identify the circumstances in which such liability may arise. The second issue, which is addressed by State courts, is whether and under what conditions State instrumentalities that have a separate and autonomous legal personality may be held liable for the pecuniary obligations of the State. A comparative law study focusing in particular on solutions found in French, English and U.S. law will provide answers to the question as to whether an award holding a State liable may be enforced against the assets of instrumentalities of that State, where such instrumentalities are prima facie separate juridical persons.

The Congressional Record is the official record of the proceedings and debates of the United States Congress. It is published daily when Congress is in session. The Congressional Record began publication in 1873. Debates for sessions prior to 1873 are recorded in The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States (1789-1824), the Register of Debates in Congress (1824-1837), and the Congressional Globe (1833-1873)

This book analyzes a new phenomenon in international law: international organizations assuming the powers of a national government in order to reform political institutions. After reviewing the history of internationalized territories, this book asks two questions about these 'humanitarian occupations'. First, why did they occur? The book argues that the missions were part of a larger trend in international law to maintain existing states and their populations. The only way this could occur in these territories, which had all seen violent internal conflict, was for international administrators to take charge. Second, what is the legal justification for the missions? The book examines each of the existing justifications and finds them wanting. A new foundation is needed, one that takes account of the missions' authorisation by the UN Security Council and their pursuit of goals widely supported in the international community.