Nomos of the Earth

 

Comparative Analysis of Emer de Vattel’s The Law of Nations and Carl Schmitt’s The Nomos of the Earth

The works of Emer de Vattel and Carl Schmitt represent two significant, yet distinct, contributions to the discourse on international law and political theory. Vattel’s The Law of Nations (1758) provides a foundational framework for understanding sovereignty, the conduct of states, and the principles of diplomacy. In contrast, Schmitt’s The Nomos of the Earth (1950) critiques the historical development of international law, particularly its Eurocentric underpinnings and the transition to modern global order. Together, these texts offer complementary insights into the evolution of international law, revealing both continuities and ruptures in its theoretical foundations and practical applications.

Emer de Vattel and The Law of Nations

Emer de Vattel, an 18th-century Swiss jurist, wrote The Law of Nations as a comprehensive guide for the conduct of states in their interactions with one another. His work is firmly rooted in the natural law tradition, yet it also incorporates pragmatic considerations that align with the emerging modern state system.

1. Sovereignty and Equality of States: Vattel’s most influential contribution lies in his articulation of state sovereignty. He argued that all sovereign states are equal in their rights and obligations under international law, regardless of their size or power. This principle of equality laid the groundwork for the legal and diplomatic interactions that define the modern international order.

2. The Rights and Duties of States: Vattel emphasized the dual obligations of states: to respect their own sovereignty and to honor the sovereignty of others. He proposed that states should pursue their self-interest within the bounds of justice and equity, balancing autonomy with mutual responsibility.

3. War and Diplomacy: Vattel’s legal framework provided guidance on the just causes of war, the conduct of hostilities, and the resolution of conflicts. His work underscored the importance of diplomacy as a tool for maintaining peace and resolving disputes.

4. Impact and Legacy: The Law of Nations became a seminal text, influencing the development of international law and shaping diplomatic practices in Europe and beyond. Its principles were foundational for subsequent treaties and conventions, including those that formed the basis of the League of Nations and the United Nations.

Carl Schmitt and The Nomos of the Earth

Carl Schmitt, a 20th-century German political theorist, approached international law from a critical and historical perspective. In The Nomos of the Earth, Schmitt analyzed the geopolitical and legal structures that emerged with the European colonial expansion and their impact on global order.

1. Nomos and Spatial Order: Schmitt’s concept of "nomos" refers to the fundamental order that organizes space and law. He argued that the European powers established a global nomos through colonial conquest, dividing the world into zones of order and chaos, civilization and barbarism. This spatial ordering was central to the functioning of the Eurocentric international system.

2. The Jus Publicum Europaeum: Schmitt identified the Jus Publicum Europaeum as the legal framework that governed relations among European states during the early modern period. This system, based on mutual recognition of sovereignty and balance of power, was designed to minimize internal conflicts within Europe while legitimizing colonial expansion outside it.

3. Critique of Universalism: Schmitt was critical of the universalist aspirations of modern international law, which he viewed as a continuation of Western hegemony under the guise of liberal values. He argued that the post-World War II global order, dominated by the United States, represented a shift from the spatially grounded nomos to a more abstract and imperialist legal framework.

4. Impact and Legacy: The Nomos of the Earth remains a provocative critique of international law and its historical foundations. Schmitt’s analysis challenges the assumptions of liberal internationalism, highlighting the enduring influence of power dynamics and geopolitical interests in shaping global norms.

Comparative Analysis

While Vattel and Schmitt wrote in vastly different contexts, their works intersect in important ways, revealing both the aspirations and limitations of international law.

1. Sovereignty and Equality: Vattel’s ideal of sovereign equality contrasts with Schmitt’s critique of the hierarchical and Eurocentric nature of the international system. While Vattel envisioned a system of mutual respect among states, Schmitt exposed how this ideal was undermined by colonial practices and geopolitical realities.

2. Legal Frameworks and Power: Both scholars recognized the interplay between legal norms and political power. Vattel’s framework provided a normative basis for regulating state behavior, while Schmitt highlighted how legal systems often serve as instruments of domination and exclusion.

3. War and Order: Vattel’s emphasis on just war theory aligns with Schmitt’s focus on the regulation of conflict within the Jus Publicum Europaeum. However, Schmitt’s critique of the liberal international order suggests that contemporary attempts to regulate war may perpetuate existing power asymmetries rather than achieving genuine justice.

4. Universalism vs. Particularism: Vattel’s natural law approach suggests a universal moral order underpinning international law, whereas Schmitt’s historical analysis reveals the particularistic and contingent nature of legal systems. This tension remains central to debates about the universality of human rights and the legitimacy of global governance.

Relevance to Contemporary International Law

The insights of Vattel and Schmitt continue to resonate in contemporary debates about international law and global governance. The principle of sovereign equality, championed by Vattel, remains a cornerstone of the United Nations Charter. However, Schmitt’s critique of Western hegemony highlights ongoing challenges, such as the unequal influence of powerful states in international institutions and the persistence of neo-colonial practices.

The tension between universalism and particularism also persists, as seen in debates over humanitarian intervention, climate justice, and the role of non-state actors. Vattel’s vision of a just international order provides a normative benchmark, while Schmitt’s analysis serves as a cautionary reminder of the complexities and contradictions inherent in global legal systems.

Emer de Vattel’s The Law of Nations and Carl Schmitt’s The Nomos of the Earth offer contrasting yet complementary perspectives on the evolution of international law. Vattel’s normative framework highlights the potential for law to promote justice and cooperation, while Schmitt’s critical analysis exposes the power dynamics and historical contingencies that shape legal systems. Together, their works provide invaluable insights into the aspirations and challenges of international law, inviting continued reflection on the possibilities and limitations of achieving a just global order.