Better to see international law this other way: the case against international normative positivism

Abstract

In this paper, I argue against international normative positivism, i.e., against the idea that the separation of international legal judgement from moral reasoning is not only possible, but also a good thing. First, I claim that the space for the separation of legal and moral reasoning is minimal in this legal realm, given the peculiar characteristics of the international legal system. And then, I try to show that nonpositivism in international law (i) does not lead to quietism regarding the rules, (ii) or regarding the system as a whole, (iii) that it does not give too much power to international judges, or (iv) work against democratic values, (v) that it does not lead to anarchy, and that it (vi) may not be an instrument of imperialism, but rather a tool against it.