The European International Law

[Micheal Jorden]

Historically speaking it is beyond any question that the European international law as the merchandise of Christian civilization was just among the normative systems that existed in a variety of regions of the entire world well before the sixteenth century, when European values of equality of States regarding international law begun to take shape. However, it is equally unquestionable that European international law theory has greatly influenced the contemporary interna­tional legal system, a lot more than every other normative system in history, including those illustrated. This was dictated not by the device itself, but social conditions where it grew and developed. When it is claimed, however, that "because it had been in fact Europe and not America, Asia, or Africa that first dominated and, in so doing, unified the entire world, it is not our perspective however the historical record itself which can be called Eurocentric," it is only half way from the truth, as Europe indeed "dominated" the entire world, although not "unified" it.

Unlike domestic legal system, international legal system or norms, as we regard it today, since its early days was not intended to "regulate" the relations between different social communities or national groups. Generally it had been caused by the conquest and the vindication of power of the strong on the weak. Whether to define those norms accepted among a specific international community as "rules" or "virtue", they were susceptible to the will of the powerful and guaranteed by its or their might. Once the power changed, so would the norms. Various social communities, from empires to other types of international systems, differed rather in the number of the powerful at everytime than that of an empire and an equal society. Even within the "Group of Nations" in Europe, to which international law was applicable, it had been the Great Powers that determined the course of legal development. "As the weak may propose, it is the strong that disposes." The equality reflected more of equilibrium of powerful members of a specific society than a legal order. The first normative systems, to use the term, such as for example Sinocentric tribute system, the Muslim World, did create certain norms that had binding force on the members of the community, but based on feudalist social system model or religious faith, such legal systems both socially and culturally had their inbuilt defects, perhaps to be "unilateralistical and hierarchical", to claim and achieve general application on the global basis. More importantly, none of the powers possessed the required abilities and material power to make sure its dominance on earth, if it wanted or not.

What happened on the European continent following the industrial revolution became popular increased the pace of the European colonial expansion. Using their rapidly growing military and economic strength, European States succeeded in opening and dividing up Asian and African continents by cannons (also canons) and warships to acquire access with their market and natural resources, together with their moral and legal justifications due to their colonial rule. Although in the international treatise, lease or cession of territory, creation of protectorate, trade preferences, consular jurisdiction, etc. were done by the agreement of the States concerned in the shape of treaties, these legal concepts and rules were obviously not shared by the non-European countries as normatively acceptable, but simply deemed as "unequal treaties" imposed by western powers. From the European perspective, these Asian and African countries were not considered as equals under their international law either Extradition treaty non-compliance by the US. At the beginning of the twentieth century, only 46 States on earth were regarded as fully sovereign, among which just Turkey and Japan were non-Christian countries. A sizable the main law provided the legal basis for the colonial expansion and exploitation by the imperialist powers of the Asian and African countries. This Eurocentric origin of international law is critically acquiesced by all sides now and no further presents any debatable issue.