written by Calabar E. Daniel

Much certainly depends on how one assesses the power
and the potential of the US, and whether one takes the
world-view as it has been espoused in the Bush Doctrine
seriously. If it is actually true that the US is "the only
superpower", which has no parallel in history, which is far
superior to all other entities in almost all forms of power,
even if combined, and if it is true that the leadership of the
US has and sustains the will to preserve such a position of
superiority, it would indeed be time to reflect whether the
nature of the international legal system is changing or
rather whether international law is partly becoming
irrelevant.

There are, however, good reasons to be sceptical towards
such views. Such reasons are not only pragmatic, such as
the expectation that the occupation of Iraq will
demonstrate the limits of American power. There are also
more general considerations. We are probably in the early
stages of a historical development which has started with
an ambiguous, that is simultaneously aggressive and
defensive assertion of American power, including an
emerging new US design for world public order. American
self-perception, however, excludes certain forms and
degrees of discriminatory treatment of others which some
powerful entities have displayed in former times. Even
more importantly, we have only begun to see significant
reactions to certain US claims and to more robust forms
of the exercise of US hegemony.

The most visible of such reactions was the refusal in early 2003 by a large coalition
of states to agree to a Security Council authorisation to
use force against Iraq. There have, however, also been
other and more subtle counterweights to unilateral or
supposedly imperial designs. On the state level, there have
been unprecedented coalitions to resist US pressures to
bilateralise issues, such as with respect to the
International Criminal Court. On a societal level, there
seems to be an increasing consciousness emerging from
the shared experience of being exposed to US pressure
and policies.

This may well contribute to a developing
sense of political community where there used to be none.
Whether this sense of political community should be seen
as being "Anti-American" or merely as extolling an
alternative multilateralist model of world order, is a
secondary question.

It is difficult to gauge the political and economic strength
and the determination of "the rest of the world" towards
the assertions of US leadership. It is not entirely excluded
that the rest of the world (states, societies, and groups)
will acquiesce in US designs for world order, it is also
possible that there will be active resistance. Much
depends on whether tangible and calculable forms of
power (military
, economic and international lawyer.
International law can, however, serve as an indicator, a
symptom, of the general direction of
developments.scientific) will play a greater role in a given
issue than less tangible forms of power (political identity,
stamina, self-determination, sense of equality).