International Law

Chapter III — The World-Family of Nations

THE WORLD-FAMILY OF NATIONS

This Chapter deals with the rights and duties of nations, one towards another, a matter which is determined by international law. There follows a special consideration on the subjects of peace and war. The Chapter is accordingly divided into two Articles, as follows:

Article I. International Law
Article 2. Peace and War

Article 1. International Law

a) Definition and Division b) The Principle of Non-Intervention

a) Definition of International Law

Man enters at birth into the society of his fellows, not only of some, but of all. For all men have the same nature, and all are directed to the achieving of the same end. Thus there is a kind of universal community which we may call international society. The immediate members of this international society are nations, or civil societies, or States, and, since these are moral persons, they are the apt and proper subjects of rights and duties. The body of these rights and duties makes up what is called International Law.

International law is, therefore, defined as the sum total of rights and duties, natural and positive, by which nations are bound in their relations with one another.

To explain the definition: We say that international law is the sum total of rights and duties, for nations are moral persons and as such can and do have rights and duties. We continue, natural and positive, because some of these rights and duties are founded upon the natural law while others are the result of positive law or of international treaties and compacts. Finally we say, by which nations are bound, etc., for international law does not express the rights and duties of individual men one to another, nor the rights and duties of a State or nation with regard to its citizens and the direction of its internal affairs, but of the rights and duties of nation with regard to nation.

Now, just as a man, a physical person, has the right to preserve his life, health, and integrity, and to perfect his powers of mind and body by the exercise of free human activity within the bounds of honest and moral conduct, so a nation has the right to preserve and to perfect itself. And, this right being granted, it follows that other nations are in duty bound to respect it, and to refrain from lawlessly violating it. Hence:

i. No nation may lawlessly trespass upon the territory of another; nor may large nations feel free of this law with regard to small ones. All nations are equal in natural rights; and might does not make right.

ii. No nation may unjustly interfere with the internal affairs of another. Thus no nation may incite citizens of another to rebel against their lawful government.

iii. A nation may interfere to assist a nation unjustly oppressed. The principle of non-intervention is fallacious in theory and impossible in practice. Of this we shall speak in detail later on.

iv. A nation has the right to acquire new territory by accession, by first occupancy, and by treaty; and it has the right of dominion over all of its territory together with water-courses, and over neighboring seas to an extent required for its security; it has the right to develop its natural resources.

v. A nation has the right to recognition and respect on the part of other nations and their citizens; her embassies in other countries are sacred and inviolable.

b) The Principle of Non-intervention

Nations are bound in justice and in charity to respect all lawful rights of other nations. Against the obligation of charity the so-called “principle of nonintervention” offends. We shall speak of this in brief detail.

The principle of non-intervention may be fomnr lated as follows: No nation has the right of aiding another which is in the throes of internal dissension or which is attacked by another nation. This principle is fallacious in theory and impossible in practice.

The principle of non-intervention is fallacious in theory. A nation has the right to self-preservation, and has the further right to use means to this end which are necessary or useful, so long as this use involves no violation of another’s rights. Now, one of the licit means of self-preservation is the asking of aid from another when unjustly attacked: this is true of individual men and of nations, nor is there any alien right violated by such a request, or by acceding to such a request. Therefore, a nation in distress may ask for help, and such help may lawfully be given, nor may any third nation licitly prevent such help being given. Similarly, a man unjustly attacked may lawfully cry for help, and help may be given, nor may any third person lawfully interfere to prevent such help being given. And when a nation is in the throes of internal disorder or anarchy, it may ask for help and lawfully receive it, just as a man, suddenly stricken by sickness, may ask the aid of others and the ministrations of a physician. As it would be uncharitable and inhuman to deny the sick man’s request, so it would be uncharitable and inhuman for one nation to refuse to help another in taking lawful measures to put down sedition and internal disorder.

The principle of non-intervention is impossible in practice. Suppose nation A is attacked unjustly by nation B. Nation A calls upon Nation M for assistance. Nation M refuses aid. But by its very refusal, nation M is aiding nation B, the aggressor. The principle of non-intervention requires that no favor be shown by either side; and here we have nation M, professing adherence to the principle, yet, in the very act of adherence, contradicting the principle. For not to aid the oppressed is to show favor to the oppressor.

Summary of the Article

In this short Article we have explained the meaning of international law and have indicated the natural right of nations to self-preservation and development. We have mentioned some special points in which this right finds expression.

We have studied the principle of non-intervention, and have found that it is to be rejected as fallacious in theory and impossible in practice.