Content area
Full Text
Articles
Introduction
This article deals with the problem of disobedience among states in international relations. More precisely it examines the preconditions for a practice of civil disobedience, mentioned in literature as State Civil Disobedience (SCD).1The international society tradition pictures states as acting in a normative and institutional context. As Hedley Bull famously argued, states 'form a society in the sense that they conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules in their relations with one another, and share in the working of common institutions'.2According to general political theory, civil disobedience necessitates a society with institutions and moral standards against which acts of disobedience can be evaluated. The point of civil disobedience is to bring about moral improvement of institutions in cases where there is no judicial redress. This article examines the conditions for states to practice civil disobedience in international society, focusing on the justification and legitimisation of such action. The international society framework is central to SCD because civil disobedience cannot be practiced in a normative vacuum but necessitates some degree of shared rules, norms, and institutions. Civil disobedience is controversial. It is a potential threat to social order but is also possibly a vitalising element.3Accordingly, the consequences of SCD can be both negative, posing a threat to the security of states and peoples as well as have positive consequences when contributing to improving the rules and institutions of international society for good of peoples and communities.
It is shown that when applying the notion of civil disobedience to international society a number of critical issues arise, not only about the justification and legitimacy of disobedience, but also about conceptions of international society more generally. First, the practice of legitimate disobedience in any association puts strains to bear on the rules of conduct that make up the association and this makes SCD difficult to practice in an association such as international society, relying as it does, a great deal on the policies and powers of a few dominating actors. Second, it is argued that the unequal power of states make SCD not so much an instrument of the weak but perhaps mainly an instrument of the strong, hence undermining not only the idea of civil...