Iulian Petre Jianu reviews Raluca Grosescu and Ned Richardson-Little’s (eds.) Socialism and International Law. The Cold War and its Legacies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024, ISBN 978-0198920175, 288 pgs.
Iulian Petre Jianu, PhD (European University Institute, Florence), focused his research on the role of economic evidence and judicial heuristics in competition law litigation. He also holds a BA in Jurisprudence from Oxford University.
Raluca Grosescu and Ned Richardson-Little’s new edited volume Socialism and International Law, published by Oxford University Press this year, challenges two dominant historical narratives of the development of international law: what we might call the orthodox view, which holds that Western liberal countries led the evolution of international law, as well as the opposing one that emphasizes the challenges of Third World post-colonial countries to Western hegemony. The book does so by explaining the role, contributions, and initiatives of socialist countries and socialist intellectuals in developing international law. Socialist states made important contributions in several relevant areas, such as defining the crime of aggression, supporting national self-determination as part of a sustained campaign seeking to dismantle colonialism, and advocating for the criminalization of racial discrimination and apartheid.
The authors’ initial theoretical claim is that “the history of international lawmaking has long been written through a Eurocentric lens, taking the development of law as a self-evidently Western and liberal project.” (p. 1) Based on this theoretical fundament, the aim of the book is to develop a new understanding of the contributions of socialist scholars and governments to the development of international law.
As an interdisciplinary scholar at the cross-roads of memory politics, transitional justice, and international law, Raluca Grosescu convincingly dismantles prevailing narratives which present socialist countries as a monolithic block that opposed the Western-led development of international law. One of her main claims is that socialist countries actively shaped and often led progressive developments in international law, while at the same time being divided by their geographical and historical experiences as postwar East European or post-colonial Third World states. In particular, Grosescu’s chapter on the criminalization of apartheid and racial discrimination convincingly challenges earlier assumptions in this regard.
Co-editor Ned Richardson-Little is a historian of international law, state ideology, and human rights, with a strong focus on East Germany. His compelling contribution to the volume explores the development of international air hijacking law. While addressing a topic particularly relevant for the history of the two German states, his analysis illustrates tensions between the declarative and often times real commitment of Eastern Bloc states to anti-colonial national liberation movements in the Global South and their preparedness to take hard measures against emigration or other issues perceived as vital to their national interests or even mere survival. In such cases, Eastern Bloc countries were often ready to ally with the West to avert perceived dangers, despite ideological differences, as mentioned in the introduction:
The socialist world played a crucial role in the development of the theory and practice of international law. While socialist states were indeed often impediments to specific Western liberal initiatives, they did not simply reject international law and made unique contributions to its genesis and evolution in the postwar period and beyond. (p. 5)
More specifically, the book makes three main contributions to the field. The first is a detailed analysis of the differences in outlook and policy inside the socialist bloc itself. This analysis of intra-socialist differences, collaboration, and disputes paves the way for further research towards a better understanding of the contribution of socialism to the development of international law.
Second, the volume shows that socialist international law underwent repeated changes throughout the twentieth century as a response to important international developments. The development of socialist international law was shaped by an internal debate around the issue of whether international law should be regarded as universalist. Initially, claims of universalism were viewed suspiciously by socialist legal scholars who saw international law as a hegemonic tool of capitalist countries designed to subjugate all states.
State socialist governments and experts from across the globe generated new legal theories and led the adoption of key legal principles and norms often in conflict with liberal internationalists in the West. Some of these initiatives were un-successful, but many others are recognized today as jus cogens or serve as the basis for current transnational mobilizations for social justice and global equality. (p. 5–6)
After the Second World War, socialist states embraced universalism insofar as it related to peace, national self-determination and anticolonialism, as it enabled them to criticize colonial powers and subsequently build bridges with emerging new states in Africa and Asia. Even so, the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc states never went as far as embracing a right to self-determination at the sub-national level, which resulted in socialist states for the most part not supporting sub-national Third World liberation movements (i.e. not supporting the redrawing of borders).
Third, the book analyzes the importance of international organizations as brokers and guardians of emerging international law. The UN, in particular, brought the three “Worlds” together by providing a platform for protracted negotiations over international norms, which sometimes led to advancements in the international legal order.
In the first chapter, Sebastian Gehrig provides an overview of the historical evolution of Soviet approaches to international law, arguing that they were intrinsically linked to domestic debates about the role of law in socialism. In the second chapter, Brad Simson traces socialist approaches to the right of (national) self-determination, including support for the independence of former colonies. The chapter also highlights intra-socialist rifts between East European states and Third World socialist countries or movements, with disagreements over support for secessionist and indigenous movements, such as in the Somalia-Ethiopia conflict or the Eritrean independence movement. Furthermore, the chapter explores the internal contradictions within the USSR’s view on self-determination in light of its interventions in the GDR, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan.
Jakub Szumski and Ryan Martinez Mitchell explore legal pluralism within the socialist world with their chapters on the Poznań School and the historical engagement of China with international law. The remaining chapters of this volume present the contributions of socialist law on specific aspects of international law: the concept of aggression (Michelle Penn), health as a human right (Bogdan C. Iacob), the protection of culture (Nelly Bakus), the abolition of prostitution and stopping human trafficking, in conjunction with resisting a “colonial clause” (Sonja Dolinsek and Philippa Hetherington), the criminalization of apartheid and the recognition of national liberation movements (Raluca Grosescu), and the development of air hijacking law (Ned Richardson-Little). The last chapter, written by Paul Betts, charts a way forward for the field and calls for research into the legacies and continued relevance of socialist international law in light of the current crisis of its liberal counterpart.
Up until recently, socialist law was, at best, not taken seriously, and at worst, seen as a cover-up for the undemocratic nature of the socialist system. Indeed, both in Western societal discourse and academia, “un-lawfulness” and the “un-rule of law” continue to be widely regarded as defining features of socialist countries. This is evident in the semi-official usage of the term “Unrechtsstaat” by the German government when referring to the GDR. The term juxtaposes the perceived systemic human rights abuses and lawlessness of the East German state with the liberal, democratic, and rule of law (Rechtsstaat) basis in the Federal Republic. However, contrary to prevailing narratives, socialist states both in Eastern Europe and in the Third World were preoccupied with developing international law and justice and this volume largely succeeds in substantiating this main claim.
As is often the case with scholarship that seeks to upend a prevailing narrative and to open the way for further exploration of under researched topics, the volume cannot encompass all the debates within the topic in a comprehensive way. Being aware of such limits, the authors signpost several areas for further research. As the topic had clearly been neglected and misunderstood, more research is needed to strengthen conceptually the understanding of the nature of socialist international law and to put some of the claims of the volume on a stronger footing.
First, more in-depth research could analyze the tension between national and transnational approaches to international law by socialist states.
As explained in the volume, socialist states were not successful in establishing a functioning framework of socialist international law. Instead, they always participated in international law from a national perspective, which often led to diverging views. This tension speaks to a deeper dilemma of the socialist project: despite claiming otherwise, socialist countries were never able to overcome the nation state as fundamental organizing principle.
A second related point is the lack of emphasis put by most socialist states on enforcement mechanisms and empowering international institutions. This is in stark contrast to the apparently progressive and reformist zeal of socialist states in developing international law.
The gap between law and enforcement suggests at first glance a view of international law as performative morality or a political tool rather than a binding instrument.
However, Ned Richardson-Little’s case study demonstrates exceptions to this trend. For instance, Eastern European socialist states at times favored binding legal instruments to ensure prosecution of air hijackers. As the editors stated in the introduction:
Third, further research could place more emphasis on the tensions between the domestic/intra-socialist and the international spheres, particularly regarding human rights and national self-determination. Additionally, studying why certain areas were simply missing from socialist engagement with international law could prove insightful. For instance, socialist states fought against and/or ignored key provisions of international law such as “the right of citizens to leave their country,” which was enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1976. Furthermore, as mentioned, the multiple Soviet-led armed interventions in other independent states called socialist states’ commitment to the principle of national self-determination into question.
Without meaning to reopen debates on whether the term “Unrechtsstaat” applies after all to socialist countries or compare socialist shortcomings in implementation and enforcement with Western violations of international law, a deeper exploration of the divergence between socialist international legal theory and practice could provide valuable insights into the role and scope of international law for socialist states.
Overall, Socialism and International Law. The Cold War and its Legacies offers a compelling argument for recognizing the contributions of socialist states to the development of international law. It provides an overview of the early intra-socialist theoretical debates over the role of law in socialist societies and then charts the development of pluralistic socialist approaches to international law. Subsequently, the book details the contributions of socialist states to a variety of core fields of international law, such as national self-determination, decolonization, peace, and anti-apartheid. Hence, historians and legal scholars of international law will find this book crucial in developing new research directions.
