Sovereignty: an introduction and brief history.

Sovereignty: an introduction and brief history. Most citizens of most states recall, in eulogy or in censure, afounding moment when battles, heroes, speeches, debates and compromisesbrought about a new constitution, an enduring new orthodoxy of politicalauthority and principles. They speak of 1776, 1789 and 1917, ofpreserving the spirit of the revolution and the intentions of itsfounders. Rarely, though, do such sentiments apply to internationalrelations international relations,study of the relations among states and other political and economic units in the international system. Particular areas of study within the field of international relations include diplomacy and diplomatic history, international law, . Occasionally scholars write of our "Westphaliansystem," but only cooly to categorize and chronicle not topronounce or polemicize po��lem��i��cize?intr.v. po��lem��i��cized, po��lem��i��ciz��ing, po��lem��i��ciz��esTo write or deliver an argument; engage in disputation or controversy.Verb 1. . Why the reticence? It probably has much to dowith the dominance of the realist tradition, according to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. which thehistory of international relations is an endless competition betweenarmies and economies; rules, constitutions and notions of politicalauthority, then, are only deceptive, forgettable for��get��ta��ble?adj.Fit or apt to be forgotten: a movie with very forgettable characters.Adj. 1. forgettable - easily forgottenunforgettable - impossible to forget surface reflections. Iwill argue for the reality of these reflections. Internationalrelations, too, has something akin to a constitution, embodied in what Iwill call "norms of sovereignty," and this constitution isformed through revolutions: Tumult yields novel orthodoxy.Today sovereignty is again the issue. There is evidence that anotherrevolution is afoot. Against the spirit of "the end ofhistory," new actors are claiming new forms of authority. TheEuropean Union and the United Nations endorse the right to independenceof secessionist Yugoslavian republics; the U.N. and its proxy armiesintervene in Somalia, Iraq and Rwanda for humanitarian reasons and applysanctions on Haiti on behalf of democracy, all without the consent oflocal parties; legal scholars note an "emerging right to democraticgovernance" which makes domestic government a matter ofinternational concern; and E.U. states make new progress toward the"pooling" of authority in a common institution.[2] Thesetrends are still partial; whether they will become durable norms in thenew world order is not yet certain. But if they do, together they willamount to one of the rare international revolutions in sovereignty sincemedieval times.If the current relevance of the state is our question, then theseemerging norms of sovereignty are noteworthy. They are not, however, allthat is important to the state. Increased flows of trade, money,information and armaments, and changes in laws governing ownership andcitizenship dramatically alter the state's functions and efficacy,but have little to do with sovereignty, which itself is purely a matterof legitimate authority. Although revolutions in norms of sovereigntyare only part of important political change, they are an inestimably in��es��ti��ma��ble?adj.1. Impossible to estimate or compute: inestimable damage.See Synonyms at incalculable.2. important part, and we ought to know something about their nature andhistory. I seek, then, to introduce sovereignty in two stages. First, Ioffer a sorely needed definition and explore some of its variations. Ithen offer a brief history of its crucial historical junctures andfounding moments.International lawyers have so thoroughly delineated, demarcated,explicated, qualified and categorized sovereignty that the term'scontinued useful precision is open to question.[3] Yet, becausesovereignty has so often been appealed to or claimed, in both polemicsand preambles, by statespeople, diplomats and members of parliamentconcerned about the integrity of their authority, and because itcomprises the struts and joists without which statecraft state��craft?n.The art of leading a country: "They placed free access to scientific knowledge far above the exigencies of statecraft"Anthony Burgess.Noun 1. would notexist, it cannot be scuttled.But sovereignty needs definition. Precisely because of its complexhistorical evolution, finding a definition encompassing every usagesince the 13th century is a pipe dream.[4] However, there is a broadconcept - not a definition, but a wide philosophical category - whichunites most of sovereignty's past, and with which we can begin:authority. Authority is "the right to command and correlatively cor��rel��a��tive?adj.1. Related; corresponding.2. Grammar Indicating a reciprocal or complementary relationship: a correlative conjunction.n.1. ,the right to be obeyed."[5] It is legitimate when it is rooted inlaw, tradition, consent or divine command, and when those living underit generally endorse this notion. Legitimate authority is cruciallydifferent from power, which is raw, pure, physical and direct. Power,according to Steven Lukes, is exercised "when A affects B in amanner contrary to B's real interests."[6] Even at its mostmonarchical and dictatorial, even in the case of the absolute law-givingmonarch of Jean Bodin or Thomas Hobbes, sovereignty is conferred by somenotion of right which provides a basis for assent other thancoercion.[7]This is not to deny that sovereignty and power are related. Ifsovereignty is not mere power, neither is it mere legitimacy; it mustnot only have a basis in right, but also be practiced. A king orpresident must be able to carry out the essential duties of his office.A sovereign state SOVEREIGN STATE. One which governs itself independently of any foreign power. must have uncontested control of its religion and itsarmy, its economy and justice. When Shakespeare's Bolingbrokeforced Richard II to abdicate, Richard had to admit the loss ofsovereignty, the erosion of his divine royal mandate: "I findmyself a traitor with the rest:/For I have given here my soul'sconsent/Tundeck the pompous body of a king;/Made glory base; andsovereignty, a slave."[8] And although the Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire,designation for the political entity that originated at the coronation as emperor (962) of the German king Otto I and endured until the renunciation (1806) of the imperial title by Francis II. stillexisted and claimed prerogatives over states' internal policiesafter 1648, its authority was little more than parchment. Sovereignauthority requires power to back up its legitimate claims. The obverse,it should be noted, is also true: Legitimacy, evoking allegiance andrespect, can itself lend force to sovereign claims.A sizable portion of a ruler's power, however, derives not fromsovereignty's legitimacy, but from coarser factors. Due to bothfate and ability, different U.S. presidents with precisely the sameconstitutional prerogatives have varied greatly in their power to passlaws through Congress, assert their will against the various U.S. statesand make war on foreign countries. Internationally, one can imagine twosmall, equally sovereign states: one a "holder of the balance"arbitrating great powers' contests; the other uninfluential Adj. 1. uninfluential - not influentialinfluential - having or exercising influence or power; "an influential newspaper"; "influential leadership for peace" andbuffeted in the world economy. While sovereignty is inestimablysignificant, the scope of power is much wider.If sovereignty is not the same as power, neither is it synomymouswith law. To Bodin and Hobbes, modem sovereignty's first systematicarticulators, the legitimate sovereign was not only above human law, butthe source of it. However, since the 18th century, this has changed. Atfirst in the constitutionally advanced Western states, now virtuallyeverywhere, human lawgivers are no longer legitimately sovereign.Instead, constitutions and international legal agreements define thescope of all rulers' and citizens' legitimate authority.At this point, the definition is still too broad. A police chief,priest and corporate executive all have legitimate authority; rarely arethey called sovereign. Sovereignty has always involved anotheringredient: supremacy. In the chain of authority by which I look to ahigher authority, who in turn looks to a higher one, the holder ofsovereignty is highest. No one may question it or legitimately opposeit. Supremacy is certainly what Bodin and Hobbes had in mind, and it isat the heart of most subsequent definitions. A final necessaryingredient is territoriality TerritorialityBehavior patterns in which an animal actively defends a space or some other resource. One major advantage of territoriality is that it gives the territory holder exclusive access to the defended resource, which is generally associated with . Sovereignty is authority within a discreteland, bounded by borders. Territoriality accompanies supremacy; andauthority would not be supreme if there were challengers within itsrealm. As I discuss below, during the Middle Ages, when there was nosovereignty, every ruler both endured limits within his own territoryand enjoyed some claims over the internal prerogatives of other rulerswithin Christendom. Territoriality is modern; it defines internationalrelations.[9]We have reached the limits of specificity: Sovereignty is supremelegitimate authority within a territory. All particular historical usesof the term have meant a particular form of supreme legitimateauthority, reflecting one or another philosophy in a given epoch;sovereignty is never without an adjective. Three kinds of adjectives arerelevant to understanding sovereignty's variants. The firstdescribes holders of sovereignty, who may be diverse. Sovereignty neednot lie in a single individual, but could also reside in a triumvirate Triumvirate(trīŭm`vĭrĭt, –vĭrāt'), in ancient Rome, ruling board or commission of three men. Triumvirates were common in the Roman republic. ,a Committee of Public Safety, the people (in Rousseau's version) ora body of law. In most modern states, a constitution prescribing theauthority of political offices is sovereign, while over some matters,international law or E.U. law may also be sovereign. The legitimateholders of sovereignty have, of course, changed over time. Indeed, onone reading, modern political philosophy has been a debate about whoholds sovereignty.Another relevant pair of adjectives is "internal" and"external," which are not distinct types of sovereignty, butcomplementary, always coexistent, aspects of sovereignty. Supremeauthority within a territory implies both undisputed supremacy over theland's inhabitants and independence from unwanted intervention byan outside authority - a church, an empire, another state or a UnitedNations. It is to the external aspect of sovereignty that moderninternational legal scholars and political scientists refer.[10] In abroader historical perspective, however, in which the state becomes thelegitimate polity at Westphalia or colonies attain independence in the20th century, both internal and external sovereignty are at issue.Sovereignty may finally be divided into absolute and non-absolute.This may at first seem an odd distinction. If sovereign authority issupreme, how can it be less than absolute? Absoluteness, though, doesnot refer to the quality or magnitude of sovereignty, for if sovereigntywere less than supreme in any particular matter, it would not besovereignty at all. But a sovereign need not be sovereign over allmatters. Absoluteness refers to the scope of affairs over which asovereign body governs within a particular territory. Is it supreme overall matters or merely some? In those matters to which a sovereignbody's authority does not extend, it is typically the internationallaw or institution prescribing how authority is to be shared that issovereign. The government of France This article is about the political and administrative structures of the French government. For French political parties and tendencies, see Politics of France. The government of France is supreme in foreign policy but notin trade, which it governs jointly with the other E.U. members asprescribed by E.U. law. The French government's sovereignty isnonabsolute. For Bodin and Hobbes, by contrast, sovereignty meantauthority over all matters; it was absolute, unconditionally.[11]Absolute sovereignty is archetypical ar��che��type?n.1. An original model or type after which other similar things are patterned; a prototype: "'Frankenstein' . . . 'Dracula' . . . 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' . . . modern sovereignty. It is the normto which the E.U. and humanitarian intervention are two exceptions. Itrenders international relations anarchical, for it makes states whollyautonomous; they are not required to yield or genuflect gen��u��flect?intr.v. gen��u��flect��ed, gen��u��flect��ing, gen��u��flects1. To bend the knee or touch one knee to the floor or ground, as in worship.2. To be servilely respectful or deferential; grovel. to any outsideauthority. It is the sort of sovereignty with which we are mostfamiliar.Now, I have said that international relations has a constitution, andyet sovereignty thus far defined deals only with the authority ofspecific states, whereas an international constitution governs theauthority of several states in a system, or even every state on theglobe. Such a constitution consists of "norms of sovereignty,"commonly agreed-upon rules that define the holders of sovereignty andtheir prerogatives. Norms of sovereignty answer three questions, whichwe may think of as the three "faces" of sovereignty. First,who are the legitimate polities in international politics? States? TheHoly Roman Empire? The European Union? Second, who is entitled to becomeone? If states are legitimate, who may become one? Nations thatcurrently have no state of their own? What about colonies? Third, whatessential prerogatives in making and enforcing decisions do thelegitimate polities enjoy? Are states free from all intervention, or arethere some matters in which they are subject to interference?[12]As the constitution of international relations, norms of sovereignty,like sovereignty itself, are both legitimate and practiced. Legitimacyis important to the idea of a norm, for it implies that politiesacknowledge norms as basic rules, not just coincident interests.Usually, legitimate norms are ones that are codified cod��i��fy?tr.v. cod��i��fied, cod��i��fy��ing, cod��i��fies1. To reduce to a code: codify laws.2. To arrange or systematize. in a treaty, acovenant or a charter. Always, they are generally perceived as right, orat least as the "normal" expected state of affairs. Aviolation of the norm by one state would be seen by other states notjust as hostile policy, but as a breach of rules which they all value.During the Westphalian era, when state sovereignty was sacrosanct sac��ro��sanct?adj.Regarded as sacred and inviolable.[Latin sacrs , ifFrance were to attack Austria on account of Austria's encroachmentin Italy or Germany, France would be hostile but not a violator ofnorms. If France were to intervene in Austria to counter creepingProtestantism or install a liberal democracy, it would violate thelegitimate rules of the game.But norms must also be generally practiced or adhered to, otherwiseit would mean very little that they are a constitution. Attendant uponthe norm of decolonization decolonizationProcess by which colonies become independent of the colonizing country. Decolonization was gradual and peaceful for some British colonies largely settled by expatriates but violent for others, where native rebellions were energized by nationalism. was the actual freeing of colonies;similarly, following the Peace of Westphalia Noun 1. Peace of Westphalia - the peace treaty that ended the Thirty Years' War in 1648 , states only rarelyforcibly interfered in the religious affairs of other states. This doesnot rule out occasional violations or anomalies - not all coloniesgained immediate independence as soon as colonialism became illegitimatein the 1960s. Indeed, the most important difference between domesticconstitutions and international constitutions is that in the domesticrealm, one expects the regular enforcement of law, whereas in theinternational realm, violators often go unpunished unpunishedAdjectivewithout suffering or resulting in a penalty: the guilty must not go unpunished, such crimes should not remain unpunishedAdj. 1. . But theinternational norm must be generally obeyed, at least by all those whohave the power to violate it; that some colonies were exceptions, andfor the most part became independent within a decade, allows us to saythat a norm of decolonization existed from the early 1960s.If, however, there exists a rogue or revisionist state that bothrejects a norm and has the power to and does overturn it or constantlyviolate it, then the norm does not in fact exist - it is not practiced.A rogue state must be a powerful state, one that can effectively preventthe norm's practice or force other states to fight to preserve it.A historical period in which such a state exists is one of"contested norms," meaning not that the old norm has beenreplaced by a new one, but that no norm at all elicits general support.Although the 1555 Treaty of Augsburg prescribed Westphalian statesovereignty in Germany, neither Catholic nor Protestant powers acceptedits terms, and in fact continued to invade one another's religiousprivacy. Only after 1648 was the Augsburg formula accepted, respectedand practiced. Although the Pope condemned the settlement, he could donothing to oppose it in an age in which Stalin would ask, "How manydivisions has the Pope?"We can read the essential character of any era in internationalrelations through its norms of sovereignty. Since new norms ofsovereignty are to the history of international relations what thefounding of new republics and empires is to the history of France The History of France has been divided into a series of separate historical articles navigable through the list to the right. The chronological era articles (highlighted in blue) address broad French historical, cultural and sociological developments. or theConstitutional Convention is to the history of the United States “American history” redirects here. For the history of the continents, see History of the Americas.The United States of America is located in the middle of the North American continent, with Canada to the north and the United Mexican States to the south. , it isworthwhile to look at these founding moments, these revolutions insovereignty, and ask what sort of orders they have created.[13]Before the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, the first modern revolution insovereignty, there was no sovereignty; no legitimate authority wassupreme within its territory. The previous era, the Middle Ages, canbest be described by the Pauline metaphor of the Body of Christ This article is about the religious concept. For article about the sect, see The Body of Christ.The Body of Christ is a term used by Christians to describe believers in Christ. Jesus Christ is seen as the "head" of the body, which is the church. , whichwas used by contemporary publicists, philosophers, theologians andholders of power to describe their political and social world. Allbelievers in the true faith were members of a single organism in whicheach individual found his definition, identity and purpose, where alllived in common under the same law and morals and where none was severedor independent in his authority or beliefs. Yet not all were equal partsof this organism in purpose and role, but like the parts of the bodywere arranged in an inclusive division of labor, a complex hierarchywith the pope and emperor at the head, with kings, barons, bishops,dukes, counts and peasants each in their proper place, all connected bythe most labyrinthine lab��y��rin��thineadj.Of, relating to, resembling, or constituting a labyrinth.labyrinthinepertaining to or emanating from a labyrinth. ligaments of privilege and prerogative. Thus wassociety held together, just as the Church is united in the Body ofChrist.[14]The body metaphor describes the archetypical medieval world betweenthe 11th and 13th centuries. It is the world that Thomas Aquinasdepicted, and the world that temporal and ecclesiastical authoritiesinhabited, even if they did not like all of its terms. Now whether ornot this corpus mysticum, this Res Publica Christiana 'Res publica christiana' is a Latin phrase combining the idea of res publica + christiana to describe the worldwide community of Christianity and its well-being. A single English word with somewhat comparable meaning is "Christendom". , was true to theideal, whether or not actual patterns of authority fit the worlddescribed by its most eloquent chroniclers, is the subject of muchdebate, which I cannot cover here.(15) But it is clear that in theMiddle Ages, nobody was sovereign. Certainly there were papists whoconstrued the pope as sovereign, possessing plenitudo potestatus, andDante and Marsilius of Padua Marsilius of Padua(märsĭl`ēəs, pă`dyə), d. c.1342, Italian political philosopher. He is satirically called Marsiglio. wanted the emperor to be sovereign, butsuch ideals lingered as fantasy. Both the pope and the emperorintervened regularly in the territorial affairs of kings, nobles and ofcourse, bishops and other ecclesiasts, but there were limits to thisintervention. The same kings, nobles and ecclesiasts held prerogativesagainst the pope, the emperor and each other, prerogatives that werelocal and feudal, disconnected from any law empowering the pope oremperor. Nor was the natural law sovereign: While it was a universalmoral standard enforced and interpreted by the pope and ecclesiasticalcourts, it did not prescribe offices or powers, rights or judicialprocedures, in the way that a sovereign body of law such as the U.S.Constitution does. The norm of sovereignty was, to the degree that itcan be distilled, simply the lack of sovereignty, or what politicalscientist John Ruggie calls "heteronomy Het`er`on´o`myn. 1. Subordination or subjection to the law of another; political subjection of a community or state; - opposed to autonomy.2. (Metaph. ."(16)With the absence of sovereignty went a few other quintessentiallymedieval features. For instance, political authorities weredifferentiated in their function and set of obligations. Thousands ofmagnates, monsignors, nobles, lords, bishops, counts, kings and knightswere related through obligations, both feudal and familial, that hadbehind them pedigrees formed by generations of wars, marriages andsuccessfully argued legal claims. No two authorities were alike. Thatchurch officials were among the relevant authorities points to anotherdefining trait: the inextricability of religion and politics. Especiallybetween the reigns of Gregory VII, elected in 1073, and Innocent IV ofthe mid-thirteenth century, the pope was executive, judge andlegislator. He could guarantee treaties, devise principles governingwar, abrogate abrogatev. to annul or repeal a law or pass legislation that contradicts the prior law. Abrogate also applies to revoking or withdrawing conditions of a contract. (See: repeal) any law opposed to the natural law and mediate wars. Allthe way down the hierarchical ladder, the Church exercised authoritythat was, by any modem definition, civil. Finally, the realm ofChristendom enjoyed moral and legal unity. Although nobody was sovereignwithin this realm, natural law obligated all of the faithful, andeverybody was tied to someone else by some sort of legal bond.Much of this medieval world had disappeared by the early 16thcentury. By then, Britain, France and Sweden all looked very much likesovereign states, while princes in Germany and the Netherlands enjoyedmany of sovereignty's prerogatives. In Italy, roughly between theCouncil of Constance Noun 1. Council of Constance - the council in 1414-1418 that succeeded in ending the Great Schism in the Roman Catholic ChurchConstancecouncil - (Christianity) an assembly of theologians and bishops and other representatives of different churches or in 1415 and the sack of Rome The city of Rome has been sacked on several occasions. Among the most famous: Sack of Rome (387 BC) - Rome is sacked by the Gauls after the Battle of the Allia Sack of Rome (410) - Rome is sacked by Alaric, King of the Visigoths in 1527, there waseven a system of sovereign states, independent from the rest of Europe.Yet the Italian system did not persist. It was subsumed by its Frenchand Spanish conquerors into the European system, and this Europeansystem was not yet one of sovereign states.(17) Still redoubtable re��doubt��a��ble?adj.1. Arousing fear or awe; formidable.2. Worthy of respect or honor.[Middle English redoubtabel, from Old French redoutable, from inmuch of the continent was the Holy Roman Empire, the last medievalentity, venerated for its pedigree, persistent in its authority, butneither preeminent nor ultimate nor supreme in any particular territory.In its shadow were Germnan, Dutch and Italian princes who were under theauthority of the emperor and pope, yet enjoyed ancient liberties thatneither could challenge, along with almost totally independent citiesand countless other entities with variegated portfolios of powers.Arcane lines of authority were the norm; idiosyncrasy idiosyncrasy/id��io��syn��cra��sy/ (-sing��krah-se)1. a habit peculiar to an individual.2. an abnormal susceptibility to an agent (e.g., a drug) peculiar to an individual. was the onlyregularity.In one matter in particular, the emperors of the 16th century wouldnot tolerate autonomy within their lands: Dissent from the true faith ofthe true Church was strictly prohibited. At first, the emperor'spolicies seemed defeated and sovereignty victorious. The 1555 Peace ofAugsburg The Peace of Augsburg was a treaty signed between Ferdinand, who replaced his brother Charles V as Holy Roman Emperor, and the forces of the Schmalkaldic League, an alliance of Lutheran princes, on September 25, 1555 at the city of Augsburg in Bavaria, Germany. , whose terms included the famous formula cuius regio, euisreligio ("whose the region, his the religion"), allowed Germanprinces to enforce their own religion, Catholic or Protestant, withintheir own territory. For the princes, this meant sovereignty - it wouldcomplete their portfolio of authority. Yet Augsburg did not last. As anorm of sovereignty, it was not practiced. The Treaty's endlessclauses and mutual dissatisfaction with it ensured that when a disputearose, Catholics' and Protestants' mutual enmity, fueled atthe time by the Counter Reformation, would result in war. Battles andskirmishes arose in the 1580s and continued on and off, through trucesand outbreaks, eventually expanding into the holy cataclysm of theThirty Years' War. Not until the close of this war in 1648 wassomething like cuius regio, euis religio accepted, respected andpracticed.What, then, was this Peace of Westphalia? How did its componentTreaties of Munster and Osnabruck end Christendom and elevate thesovereign state? In the minds of the victorious French and Swedishdiplomats, the settlement quite distinctly embodied a system ofsovereign states. There is ample evidence for this in the writings ofCardinal Richelieu, while the Swedish king, Gustavus Adolphus, isrumored to have toted Grotius' writings in his saddlebag.(18) Apartfrom those who conceived this grand design, all of the victors - France,Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany - sought the detailed substance ofsovereignty, provisions that would free princes from all imperialcontrol.But a norm of sovereignty is more than a subjective inclination, andin several respects, the provisions of Westphalia indeed made sovereignstatehood state��hood?n.The status of being a state, especially of the United States, rather than being a territory or dependency. a norm, legitimate and practiced. Whereas it did not formallydissolve the Empire, Westphalia gave princes the power to make alliances- allowing them the freedom of action outside their borders that iscrucial to external sovereignty. Westphalia solidified cuius regio, euisreligio as well. Although some restrictions on the practice of religionwithin certain realms were included, neither emperor nor pope noroutside states would intervene forcefully in the religious affairs of aEuropean state for centuries afterward, just as none would ever againpose a threat to German princes' power to make alliances.(19) Thesettlement also created new sovereign states, the United Provinces andthe Swiss Confederation. Complementing all of these trends, the treatiesexplicitly curtailed the powers of the Empire and Papacy - those thatstill existed were bereft of efficacy. Fittingly, Pope Innocent X issueda bull, Zel Domus, calling the treaties "null, void, invalid,iniquitous, unjust, damnable dam��na��ble?adj.Deserving condemnation; odious.damna��ble��ness n.dam , reprobate rep��ro��bate?n.1. A morally unprincipled person.2. One who is predestined to damnation.adj.1. Morally unprincipled; shameless.2. Rejected by God and without hope of salvation. , inane, empty of meaning andeffect for all time," and as late as 1900, popes still censuredinternational law as a Protestant science, refusing to removeGrotius' De Jure [Latin, In law.] Legitimate; lawful, as a Matter of Law. Having complied with all the requirements imposed by law.De jure is commonly paired with de facto, which means "in fact. Belli ac Pacis from the Index of banned books.(20)Westphalia set new standards for each of sovereignty's threefaces. It made the sovereign state the legitimate political unit. Itimplied that basic attributes of statehood such as the existence of agovernment with control of its territory were now, along withChristianity, the criteria for becoming a state. Finally, as it came tobe practiced, the Treaty removed all legitimate restrictions on astate's activities within its territory.A few qualifications are in order. First, sovereign statehood waslimited to Europe, excluding the Ottoman Empire. Christendom was still aqualification for membership, if not a source of obligation for statesin their internal affairs. There are also some bugs in the view thatWestphalia was a complete break. A few anomalous imperial practicespersisted after 1648, and many elements of the system of sovereignstates had appeared much earlier than Westphalia. But the anomalies werejust that - traces of the past. As for Westphalia's novelty, Iwould not argue that the peace created a system of sovereign states exnihilo, but rather that it consolidated 300 years of evolution towardsuch a system.(21)A change in norms of sovereignty of this magnitude would not recurfor another 300 years. The only wholesale challenge to the Westphaliannorm - to all three of its faces - before the 20th century wasNapoleon's ultimately failed attempt to eradicate Europe'sanciens regimes and replace them with some sort of empire. Yet importantchanges did occur with respect to sovereignty's second and thirdfaces: criteria for membership and the prerogatives of states. In the19th century, two different kinds of norms of sovereignty came to bedemanded: minority rights guarantees and national self-determination,which is simply any legal arrangement that accords a nation within astate greater autonomy. That every nation should have its own state isonly the most extreme form of self-determination; other types includelimited autonomy within a federal arrangement or merely certain rightsor protections for a group within a state. Both norms aspired to beconditions for becoming states. Minority rights treaties would imposeconditions on new entrants to the European system and nationalself-determination would give captive nations the right to becomestates.When, if ever, were these norms achieved? National self-determinationwas first advocated during the French Revolution. After the bedlam dieddown, however, conservative monarchs rejected this idea, and they hardlyconsidered a general guarantee of minority rights.(22) Later in thecentury, Europe's great powers began to change their view. Britain,France and Russia granted independence to Greece in an 1830 protocol onthe condition that it protect the religious rights of Turks, while inthe 1856 Treaty of Paris The Treaty of Paris of 1783 ended the U.S. Revolutionary War and granted the thirteen colonies political independence. A preliminary treaty between Great Britain and the United States was signed in 1782, but the final agreement was not signed until September 3, 1783. , the Powers mandated similar conditions onbehalf of Moldavia and Wallachia. But it was not until the 1878 Treatyof Berlin that minority protection came to be a normal condition placedon new states.23It is commonly thought that national self-determination finallytriumphed in the settlement of the First World War under the avuncular a��vun��cu��lar?adj.1. Of or having to do with an uncle.2. Regarded as characteristic of an uncle, especially in benevolence or tolerance. sponsorship of Woodrow Wilson and at the eager behest of freshlyliberated Eastern European nations. In fact, no lasting norm emerged.National self-determination cannot be found in the League Covenant, andthe League's International Commission of Jurists The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is an international human rights non-governmental organisation. The Commission itself is a standing group of 60 eminent jurists (judges and lawyers), including members of the senior judiciary in Australia, Canada, and South Africa and confirmed itsillegitimacy illegitimacy:see bastard. Illegitimacybend sinistersupposed stigma of illegitimate birth. [Heraldry: Misc.]Clinker, Humphryservant of Bramble family turns out to be illegitimate son of Mr. Bramble. [Br. Lit. in its 1920 ruling that the Aaland Islands could not secedefrom Finland to join Sweden. Several provisions to protect minorities,however, were included. With both the defeated states - Austria,Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey - and the new or enlarged states -including Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Rumania and Greece - thevictorious allies signed treaties that guaranteed the rights ofminorities. The League of Nations Covenant also included a provision toguarantee the rights of "racial, religious or linguisticminorities" that would be enforced through a judicial arbitrationsystem.(24) In addition to providing a criterion for statehood, thetreaty system's regular monitoring function restricted statesovereignty, at least until Hitler doomed its prospects.Later in the century, in a different locale and in a differentcontext, self-determination would finally win acceptance. In 1960, theU.N. pronounced colonies illegitimate: "All peoples have the rightto self-determination" and "inadequacy of political, economicand social and educational preparedness should never serve as a pretextfor delaying independence." Colonialism was condemned as"alien subjugation SubjugationCushan-rishathaim Aramking to whom God sold Israelites. [O.T.: Judges 3:8]Gibeonitesconsigned to servitude in retribution for trickery. [O.T.: Joshua 9:22–27]Ham Noahcurses him and progeny to servitude. [O. , domination and exploitation ... a denial offundamental human rights."(25) And in roughly the decadesurrounding 1960, Britain and France granted independence to most oftheir remaining colonies. As with Westphalia, the transition was notdivinely neat. Some colonies had already been freed and others wouldtrickle into independence during the next two decades. But in thethoughts, words and deeds Words and Deeds is the eleventh episode of the third season of House and the fifty-seventh episode overall. This episode concludes the Michael Tritter story arc that began in the episode Fools for Love. of the U.N. and the vast majority of states,including the colonial powers, it was now illegitimate for a state tohave governing authority over a colony.Self-determination, however, had its limits. Only colonies wereentitled to statehood, not nations or tribes either within colonies orwithin other states. Colonies became states, modem and Westphalian, andthe norm of sovereign statehood was globally extended. Previously.sovereign statehood had only been enjoyed by European states, andgradually, by some states in other parts of the globe. At the BerlinConference in 1885, European powers set a "standard ofcivilization" dividing the world into civilized European states andbarbarian peoples who could not participate as equal law-abiding membersof the international community until they had learned the art ofgoverning. At the end of the First World War, the European powersretained the standard, although they created a mandate system making itpossible for some of the more advanced colonies to advance towardindependence under colonial "stewardship" - a provision thatamounted to little more than a vague promise of greater futureautonomy.(26) At the end of the Second World War, Britain and France,though militarily and economically weakened, decided to retain theircolonies as well as the tutelary justification for keeping them. Eventhough the U.N. Charter endorsed self-determination, Article 73 heldthat regions not ready for self-government would be treated as a"sacred trust." Only 15 years later would the globe becomeWestphalian.The first transition since Westphalia to challenge all three faces ofsovereignty has been the creation and expansion of the EuropeanCommunity, now the European Union. For the first time since the demiseof the Holy Roman Empire, a significant political authority other thanthe state, one with formal sovereign prerogatives, has becomelegitimate. The E.U. has definite criteria for membership, including awell-defined regimen for application, along with a constitution thatcarefully accords prerogatives to both member states and the E.U.bureaucracy itself. E.U. law is still sovereign only in a limited numberof areas, but member states are no longer sovereign in all areas;neither body enjoys absolute sovereignty. Over four decades, thesovereignty of each has changed in content. In 1950, the European Coaland Steel Community was created, and included France, Germany, Italy,Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The 1957 Treaty of Rome The Treaty of Rome, signed by France, West Germany, Italy and Benelux (Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg) on March 25 1957, established the European Economic Community (EEC) and came into force on 1 January 1958. According to George C. createdthe European Economic Community, a common market with institutions togovern trade and regulate diverse sorts of commerce. In 1985, the SingleEuropean Act Single European ActAct intended to eliminate barriers on trade and capital flows between and among European countries. expanded the common market and rendered many areas ofpolicy governable by a qualified majority, rather than allowing everymember a veto, thus strengthening the institution's formal powers.And in 1991 the Maastricht Treaty set as goals a common currency, thefurther integration of monetary policy and the development of a commonforeign policy, although it is still not clear to what extent these willbe realized.While the European Union is placing larger numbers of people underthe authority of an institution other than the state, the emergence of anascent norm allowing U.N.-sanctioned intervention for humanitarianpurposes actually gives individuals and peoples legitimate claimsagainst state institutions, although these are only exercised in extremedisasters. The sovereignty of the state is becoming less than absolute,the Westphalian paradigm is being weakened and the state is again, atleast to some degree, problematic.As I mentioned above, norms of sovereignty are not all that isimportant in assessing the enduring relevance of the state; many othertrends are consequential. Some of these, including treaties andagreements governing trade, armaments and thousands of technicalminutiae mi��nu��ti��a?n. pl. mi��nu��ti��aeA small or trivial detail: "the minutiae of experimental and mathematical procedure"Frederick Turner. , restrict the state's legal freedom of action, but do notalter norms of sovereignty. The content of the state's obligationsmay change, but the basic authorities who agree to these obligations,who make, monitor and enforce policy, do not change. Analogously, thelaws that exist in a domestic polity may change without its constitutionchanging. Other trends such as growing economic interdependence affect astate's power but are not necessarily accompanied by legal changes,just as a state may undergo vast economic changes that have little to dowith its laws. Norms of sovereignty are not solely matters of legalfreedom of action but also of basic authority. They are not solelymatters of power, but also of legitimate authority. Revolutions in thesenorms are rare, but they are revolutions of the most basic sort. [1] Iwould like to acknowledge the support of the Olin Institute at theCenter for International Affairs at Harvard University for thecompletion of this article. [2] On the emerging right to democraticgovernance, see Thomas Franck, "The Emerging Right to DemocraticGovernance," The American Journal of International Law, 86, no. 1(January 1992) pp. 46-91. On the concept of "poolingsovereignty," see Robert O. Keohane and Stanley Hoffmann,"Institutional Change in Europe in the 1980s," in The NewEuropean Community: Decision making and Institutional Change, ed. RobertO. Keohane and Stanley Hoffmann (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1991) pp.7-8. [3] Lassa Oppenheim wrote in 1905 that it is "doubtful whetherany single word has caused so much intellectual confusion," andRichard Falk has more recently suggested jettisoning the conceptaltogether. See L. Oppenheim, International Law, vol. 1 (London:Longman, 1905) p. 103, also quoted in Alan James, Sovereign Statehood(London: Allen & Unwin, 1986) p. 3; and Richard Falk,"Sovereignty," in Oxford Companion to Politics of the World(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993) p. 854. [4] The oldest citationof "sovereignty" in the Oxford English Dictionary Oxford English Dictionary(OED) great multi-volume historical dictionary of English. [Br. Hist.: Caught in the Web of Words]See : Lexicography is dated1290. See the second edition, prepared by J.A. Simpson and E.S.C.Weiner, volume XVI (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989) pp. 77-79. [5] R.P.Wolff, "The Conflict between Authority and Autonomy," inAuthority, ed. Joseph Raz (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990) p. 20. Here, Iuse legitimate in its descriptive sense not to mean justified or morallydefensible, but as Max Weber meant it: Something is legitimate if it isassented to, or at least regarded as part of the normal, proper state ofaffairs. For Weber, authority attains its legitimacy either because ithas tradition behind it, it has emotional power, it is rational or it islegal. See Max Weber, "The Theory of Social and EconomicOrganization," in Max Weber: The Theory of Social and EconomicOrganization, ed. Talcott Parsons (New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : The Free Press, 1947) pp.124-32. [6] See Steven Lukes, Power: A Radical View (London: Macmillan,1974) p. 34. [7] For Bodin, see Jean Bodin, On Sovereignty, ed. JulianFranklin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press (known colloquially as CUP) is a publisher given a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1534, and one of the two privileged presses (the other being Oxford University Press). , 1992); for Hobbes, seeThomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. and intro. C.B. Macpherson (Harmondsworth,UK: Penguin, 1968) pp. 223-409. [8] William Shakespeare, King RichardII, act 4, sc. 1, lines 248-51. [9] A good account of the role ofterritoriality can be found in John G. Ruggie, "Territoriality andBeyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations,"International Organization, 47, no. 1 (Winter 1993) pp. 139-74. [10]Probably the most helpful discussion of the meaning of sovereignty, oneon which I have drawn, is in Alan James, Sovereign Statehood (London:Allen & Unwin, 1986). Our two approaches are not identical. [11] Infact, this must be somewhat qualified even in the case of Bodin, forwhom the sovereign is bound by the natural law, has a duty to respectthe liberty and property of subjects who are entitled to these and isobligated to abide by To stand to; to adhere; to maintain.See also: Abide his contracts with private citizens. None of theseduties, however, gives rise to a right to resistance. See Bodin, OnSovereignty, and J.H. Franklin, Jean Bodin and the Rise of AbsolutistTheory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1973). [12] Norms ofsovereignty, then, are both "constitutive constitutive/con��sti��tu��tive/ (kon-stich��u-tiv) produced constantly or in fixed amounts, regardless of environmental conditions or demand. ," defining the basicplayers without which the game would not exist, and"regulative," specifying the rules that the players mustfollow. This oft-cited distinction between "constitutive" and"regulative" rules was first formulated by John Rawls in"Two Concepts of Rules," Philosophical Review, 64 (1955) pp.3-32. [13] My account is admittedly modern and focused on Europe. Ilimit it thus for the reason that I seek to show the origins of ourmodern system, which properly began in the Middle Ages. For an excellentstudy of state systems at various times and places, see Martin Wight,Systems of States (Leicester, UK: Leicester University Press, 1977).[14] Good descriptions of authority in the Middle Ages can be found inErnst H. Kantorowicz, The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval me��di��ae��val?adj.Variant of medieval.mediaevalAdjectivesame as medievalAdj. 1. Political Theology (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957);Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages: ThePapal Monarchy With Augustinus Triumphus and the Publicists (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1964); W. Ullmann, Principles of Governmentand Politics in the Middle Ages (London: Methuen, 1961); W. Ullmann,"Reflections on the Medieval Empire," in Transactions of theRoyal Historical Society, Fifth Series, Volume 14 (London: Offices ofthe Royal Historical Society, 1964); John Neville Figgis John Neville Figgis (1866 - 1919) was a historian, political philosopher and monk. Educated at Brighton College, he was a student of Lord Acton at Cambridge, and editor of much of Acton's work. , The DivineRight of Kings The authority of a monarch to rule a realm by virtue of birth.The concept of the divine right of kings, as postulated by the patriarchal theory of government, was based upon the laws of God and nature. , intro. G.R. Elton (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1970);and Otto Gierke, Political Theories of The Middle Age, trans. and intro.Frederic William Maitland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958).(15) In a recent article, Markus Fischer claims that in severalimportant respects, politics in the Middle Ages were not different thanin a sovereign state system. See Markus Fischer, "Feudal Europe,800-1300: Communal Discourse and Conflictual Practices,"International Organization, 46, no. 2 (Spring 1992) pp. 427-67. It istrue that Europe during pockets of the Middle Ages resembled a system ofsovereign states. Medievalist me��di��e��val��istalso me��di��ae��val��ist ?n.1. A specialist in the study of the Middle Ages.2. A connoisseur of medieval culture.medievalist1. George Duby's study of the twelfthcentury Maconnais region of southern France reveals a constant strugglebetween castellanies who were equivalent in their function andauthority, and seemed to heed no higher authority. Yet during most ofthe Middle Ages, vassals and lord did honor reciprocal obligations, andbeyond the manor, the pope and the emperor were able to press strongclaims. See Georges Duby, La societe aux Xle et XIIe siecles dans laregion maconnaise (Paris: Ecole Pratique pra��tique?n.Clearance granted to a ship to proceed into port after compliance with health regulations or quarantine.[French, from Old French practique, from Medieval Latin des Hautes Etudes, 1982). (16)See John G. Ruggie, "Continuity and Transformation in the WorldPolity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis," in Neorealism and itsCritics, ed. Robert O. Keohane (New York: Columbia University Press Columbia University Press is an academic press based in New York City and affiliated with Columbia University. It is currently directed by James D. Jordan (2004-present) and publishes titles in the humanities and sciences, including the fields of literary and cultural studies, ,1986) pp. 131-58. Ruggie writes, "The modem system is distinguishedfrom the medieval not by the 'sameness' or'difference' of units, but by the principles on the basis ofwhich the constituent units are separated from one another' (p.142, italics Ruggie's). Ruggie demonstrates that medieval notionsof property and authority were wholly different from modem ones. (17) Onthe nature and dates of the Italian system, see Martin Wight, Systems ofStates. (18) Hedley Bull, "The Importance of Grotius in the Studyof International Relations," in Hugo Grotius and InternationalRelations, ed. Hedley Bull, Benedict Kingsbury and Adam Roberts (Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1990) p. 75. (19) Below, I discuss the emergence ofprotection of religious minorities as a qualification for statehood inthe 19th century. (20) The quote is from David Maland, Europe in theSeventeenth Century (London: Macmillan, 1966) p. 161. On the pope andthe banning of Grotius, see Bull, Kingsbury and Roberts, eds., HugoGrotius and International Relations, pp. 65-94. (21) A contrastingargument, claiming that Westphalia was not a decisive break between themedieval and modem worlds, can be found in Stephen Krasner,"Westphalia and All That," in Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, ed. Judith Goldstein andRobert O. Keohane (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993) pp.235-64. The view that Westphalia was a consolidation of the evolutiontoward a system of sovereign states may be found in Martin Wight,Systems of States and Charles Tilly, Coercion, Capital, and EuropeanStates, AD 990-1992 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990) p. 167. (22) Anexception to this was Poland, which was given limited rights ofself-government despite remaining within the territories of largerpowers. Inis Claude calls this "[t]he first explicit recognitionand international guarantee of the rights of national minorities,"in National Minorities: An International Problem (Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press The Harvard University Press is a publishing house, a division of Harvard University, that is highly respected in academic publishing. It was established on January 13, 1913. In 2005, it published 220 new titles. , 1955) p. 7. (23) The 1878 treaty attached suchconditions to the statehood applications of Rumania, Serbia andMontenegro Serbia and Montenegro(sûr`bēə, mŏn'tənē`grō), Serbian Srbija i Crna Gora, former country of SE Europe, in the Balkan Peninsula, a short-lived union (2003–6) of the republics of Serbia and the much , along with similar clauses on Turkey, which had alreadyattained sovereignty. Although minorities were still persecuted, mostblaringly the Armenians, whom the Turks massacred in 1896, the greatpowers nevertheless continued to regard as legitimate the formula ofBerlin; it was a norm of sovereignty. Through the beginning of the FirstWorld War, they intervened on several occasions to enforce theseprovisions, and signed several bilateral treaties patterned on 1878. Onthese issues, see Inis Claude, National Minorities; Raymond Pearson,National Minorities in Eastern Europe 1848-1945 (London: MacmillanPress, 1983) and C.A. Macartney, National States and National Minorities(New York: Russell and Russell, 1968). (24) See Inis Claude, NationalMinorities, PP, 16-28. (25) General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), 14December 1960. (26) Under the general principle of self-determination,Article 22 of the League Covenant prescribed a mandate system in whichcolonies were to be held under "a sacred trust ofcivilization," and divided them into categories A, B and Caccording to their level of development and prospect of becoming viableindependent states. On the history of the mandate system, see QuincyWright Mandates Under the League of Nations (Chicago: University ofChicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including , 1930).