Understanding TWAIL: A Critical Approach to International Law

Abstract

Mainstream approaches to international law do not provide the necessary point of view to expose the colonial and postcolonial origins of the discipline and to deconstruct the modern international legal regime based on “sovereign inequality.” Even looking at the structure of the United Nations Security Council reveals the need for this deconstruction. According to TWAIL, international law is nothing more than a collection of principles and doctrines that have been shaped in Europe as a result of European history and experience, and it is a great paradox that the same international law claims to be universal. This is why international law will be considered “illegitimate” as long as it does not meet the expectations of the Third World. Despite the highly heterogeneous nature of the TWAIL literature, it is also possible to identify the main themes emphasized by TWAIL. As such, this study has three objectives. First, to explain what TWAIL is and the features that distinguish it from mainstream approaches, and second, to identify TWAIL’s main themes and central arguments in the heterogeneous literature in question. In this sense, the study focuses on TWAIL’s eight different schematic themes and conveys them according to the views of the leading scholars of the approach. Third, a recommendation is made about how to perceive TWAIL which contributes to the construction of an international law that may also be beneficial to the Third World.

Keywords

• TWAIL’s Main Themes
• Third World
• Critical Approach to International Law
• Colonialism and International Law
• Illegitimacy of International Law

TWAIL’i Anlamak: Uluslararası Hukuka Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım

Abstract

Uluslararası hukukun ana akım yaklaşımları, disiplinin kolonyal ve post-kolonyal kökenlerini açığa vurmak ve “egemen eşitsizlik” üzerine kurulan modern uluslararası hukuk rejimini yapı-söküme tabi tutmak için gereken bakış açısını yeterli düzeyde sağlayamamaktadır, ki Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi’nin yapısına bakmak bile bu yapı-söküme olan ihtiyacı gözler önüne sermektedir. Uluslararası hukukun eleştirel yaklaşımlarından biri olan TWAIL, bu ihtiyacı karşılama iddiasındadır. TWAIL uluslararası hukuku gerekli ve önemli görse de onu Batı’ya tabi kılınan Üçüncü Dünya’nın devam eden sömürülmesini kolaylaştıran bir araç şeklinde algılamaktadır. TWAIL akademisyenleri, uluslararası hukukun sömürgeci temellerinin yeniden incelenmesi yoluyla uluslararası hukukun tahakküm altına alıcı yönleri olarak değerlendirdikleri özelliklerini değiştirmeye çalışırlar. TWAIL’e göre uluslararası hukuk, Avrupa tarihi ve tecrübesinin bir sonucu olarak Avrupa’da şekillenmiş bazı ilke ve doktrinlerden başka bir şey değildir, ki aynı uluslararası hukukun evrensellik iddiasında bulunması da büyük bir paradokstur. Bu nedenle uluslararası hukuk, Üçüncü Dünya’nın beklentilerini karşılayamadığı müddetçe gayri meşru olarak nitelendirilecektir. TWAIL literatürünün fazlasıyla heterojen yapısına rağmen, TWAIL’in üzerinde durduğu ana temaları bulmak da mümkündür. Bu itibarla, çalışmanın üç amacı bulunmaktadır. Birinci olarak, TWAIL’in ne olduğu ve onu ana akım yaklaşımlardan ayırt eden özelliklerini açıklamak ve ikinci olarak, söz konusu heterojen literatür arasından TWAIL’in ana temalarını ve merkezi argümanlarını çekip çıkarmak. Bu anlamda çalışma, TWAIL’in sekiz farklı şematik temasına odaklanarak, bunları yaklaşımın öncü düşünürlerinin görüşleri çerçevesinde aktarmaktadır. Üçüncü olarak ise, Üçüncü Dünya’nın da menfaatine olabilecek bir uluslararası hukukun inşası için çalışan TWAIL’in nasıl algılanması gerektiği konusunda tavsiyede bulunulmaktadır.

Keywords

• TWAIL’in Ana Temaları
• Üçüncü Dünya
• Uluslararası Hukuka Eleştirel Yaklaşım
• Sömürgecilik ve Uluslararası Hukuk
• Uluslararası Hukukun Gayrimeşruluğu

References

1. Abiew, FK, The Evolution of the Doctrine and Practice Of Humanitarian Intervention (Brill 1999).
2. Amin, S, ‘The Social Movements in the Periphery: An End to National Liberation’ in Samir Amin, Giovanni Arrighi, Andre G. Frank, Immanuel M. Wallerstein (eds.), Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World-System (Monthly Review Press 1990) 96-138.
3. Anghie, A, ‘Finding the Peripheries: Sovereignty and Colonialism in Nineteenth-Century International Law’ (1999) 40(1) Harvard International Law Journal, 1-71.
4. Anghie, A, ‘Francisco De Vitoria and the Colonial Origins of International Law’ (1996), 5(3) Social and Legal Studies 321-336.
5. Anghie, A, ‘LatCrit and TWAIL’ (2012) 42(2) California Western International Law Journal 311-319.
6. Anghie, A, ‘The Evolution of International Law: Colonial and Postcolonial Realities’ (2006) 27(5) Third World Quarterly 739-753.
7. Anghie, A and Chimni, BS, ‘Third World Approaches to International Law and Individual Responsibility in Internal Conflicts’ (2004) 2, Chinese Journal of International Law, 77-103.
8. Azeem, M, ‘Theoretical Challenges to TWAIL with the Rise of China: Labor Conditions under Chinese Investment in Pakistan’ (2019) Oregon Review of International Law 20(2) 395-436.

9. Bedjaoui, M, ‘General Introduction’, in Mohammed Bedjaoui (ed), International Law: Achievements and Prospects (Martinus Nijhoff 1991).
10. Bedjaoui, M, ‘Poverty of the International Order’, in Richard A Falk, Friedrich V. Kratochwil and Saul H. Mendlovitz (eds), International Law: A Contemporary Perspective (Westview Press, 1985).
11. Berger, MT, ‘The End of the ‘Third World’?’ (1994) 15(2) Third World Quarterly 257-275.
12. Burra, S, ‘TWAIL’s Others: A Caste Critique of TWAILers and Their Field of Analysis’ (2016) 33(3) Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 111-128.
13. Chimni, BS, ‘The Past, Present and Future of International Law: A Critical Third World Approach’ (2007) 8 Melbourne Journal of International Law 499-515.
14. Chimni, BS, ‘Capitalism, Imperialism, and International Law in the Twenty-First Century’ (2012) 14 Oregon Review of International Law 17-46.
15. Chimni, BS, ‘Customary International Law: A Third World Perspective’ (2018) 112(1), American Journal of International Law 1-46.Chimni, B. S., ‘The World of TWAIL: Introduction to the Special Issue (2011) 3(1) Trade, Law and Development 14-25.
16. Chimni, BS, ‘Third World Approaches to International Law: A.Manifesto’ (2006) 8 International Community Law Review 3-27.
17. Çelebi, H ve Özdemir, AM, ‘Uluslararası Hukukta Eleştirel Yaklaşımlar’ (2010), 7(25), Uluslararası İlişkiler 69- 90.
18. Eslava, L, and Pahuja, S, ‘Between Resistance and Reform: TWAIL and the Universality of International Law’ (2011) 3 Trade Law & Development 103-130.
19. Fakhri, M, ‘Introduction - Questioning TWAIL’s Agenda’ (2012) 14(1) Oregon Review of International Law 1-15.
20. Galindo, GRB., ‘Splitting TWAIL’ (2016) 33(3) Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 37-56.
21. Gathii, JT, ‘Alternative and Critical: The Contribution of Research and Scholarship on Developing Countries to International Legal Theory’ (2000) 41 Harvard International Law Journal 263-275.
22. Gathii, JT, ‘Neoliberalism, Colonialism and International Governance: Decentering the International Law of Governmental Legitimacy’ (2000) 98(6) Michigan Law Review 1996-2055.
23. Gathii, JT, ‘TWAIL: A Brief History of its Origins, its Decentralized Network, and a Tentative Bibliography’ (2011) 3(1) Trade Law and Development 26-65.
24. Gupta, J, ‘Climate Change: A GAP Analysis Based on Third World Approaches to International Law’ (2010) 53 German Yearbook of International Law 341-370.
25. Hammoudi, A, ‘Re-Constituting the Hegemony of Western Law in the Third World: A Postcolonial Critique of Twining’s ‘General Jurisprudence’ (2013) 4(4) Transnational Legal Theory 527-548.
26. Haskell, J, ‘TRAIL-ing TWAIL: Arguments and Blind Spots in Third World Approaches to International Law’ (2014) 27(2) Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 383-414.
27. Hippolyte, AR, ‘Correcting TWAIL’s Blind Spots’ (2016) 18(1) International Community Law Review 34–52.
28. Kanwar, V, ‘Not a Place, but a Project: Bandung, TWAIL, and the Aesthetics of Thirdness’, in Luis Eslava, Michael Fakhri and Vasuki Nesiah (eds), Bandung, Global History, and International Law: Critical Pasts and Pending Futures (Cambridge University Press 2017) 140-158.
29. Kelleci, T ve Bodur Ün, M, ‘TWAIL ve Yeni Bir Hâkimiyet Aracı Olarak Koruma Sorumluluğu (R2P): Libya Örneği’, (2017) 14(56) Uluslararası İlişkiler, 89-104.
30. Lone, FN, “Cross-Fertilization of Westphalian Approaches to International Law: Third World Studies and a New Era of International Law Scholarship” (2020) 34(4) Emory International Law Review 955-996,
31. Mickelson, K, ‘Rhetoric and Rage: Third World Voices in International Legal Discourse’ (1997), 16(2) Wisconsin International Law Journal, 353-420.
32. Mickelson, K, Odumosu, I and Parmar, P, ‘Situating Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL): Inspirations, Challenges and Possibilities’ (2008) 10 International Community Law Review 351-354.
33. Mortimer, RA, The Third World Coaliton in International Politics (Westview Press 1984).
34. Mutua, M, ‘Critical Race Theory and International Law: The View of an Insider-Outsider’ (2000) 45(5) Villanova Law Review 841-853.
35. Mutua, M, ‘Critical Race Theory and International Law: The View of an Insider-Outsider’ (2000) 45(5) Villanova Law Review 841-853.
36. Mutua, M, ‘Savages, Victims and Saviours: The Metaphor of Human Rights’ (2001) 42(1) Harvard International Law Journal 201-245.
37. Mutua, M, ‘What is TWAIL?’ (2000) 94 Proceedings of the 94th Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law) 31-38.
38. Nesiab, V, ‘Decolonial CIL: TWAIL, Feminism, and an Insurgent Jurisprudence’ (2018) 112 AJIL Unbound, 313-318.
39. Okafor, OC, ‘Critical Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL): Theory, Methodology, or Both?’ (2008), 10 International Community Law Review 371-378.
40. Okafor, OC, ‘Newness, Imperialism, and International Legal Reform in our Time: A TWAILPerspective’ (2005) 43(1) Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 171-191.
41. Oppenheim, L, International Law: A Treatise Vol. 1 (1st edition, Longmans, 1905).
42. Orakhelashvili, A, ‘The Idea of European International Law’(2006) 17(2), The European Journal of International Law, 315-347.
43. Özdemir, A. M., Güç Buyruk Düzen (İmge Kitabevi 2011).
44. Özdemir, AM, Uğurlu, G ve Aykut, E, ‘Üçüncü Dünyacılık Küreselleşirken?: Uluslararası Düzenlemenin Değişen Eleştirisi’ (2012) 45(1) Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 21-50.
45. Parmar, P, ‘TWAIL: An Epistemological Inquiry’ 2008 10 International Community Law Review 363-730.
46. Rajagopal, B, ‘International Law and Its Discontents: Rethinking the Global South’ (2012) 106 American Society International Law Proceedings, 176-181.
47. Ramina, L,‘TWAIL - “Third World Approaches to International Law” and Human Rights: Some Considerations’ 2018 5(1), Revista de Investigações Constitucionais 261-272.
48. Ramina, L, ‘Framing the concept of TWAIL: “Third World Approaches to International Law”’ (2018) 32 Justiça Do Direito 5-26.
49. Rothstein, RL, ‘Limits and Possibilities of Weak Theory: Interpreting North-South’ (1990) 44(1) Journal of International Affairs 159-181.
50. Sharafudeen, M, ‘2010 - 2011: Taking the road less travelled’ (2011) 3 Trade, Law and Development 6-13.
51. Shetty, VD, ‘Why TWAIL Must Not Fail: Origins and Applications of Third World Approaches to International Law’ (2012) 3 King’s Student Law Review 68-82.
52. Solarz, MW, ‘‘Third World’: The 60th Anniversary of a Concept that Changed History’ (2012) 33(9) Third World Quarterly 1561-1573.
53. Sreejith, SG, ‘An Auto-Critique of TWAIL’s Historical Fallacy: Sketching an Alternative Manifesto’ (2016) 38(7) Third World Quarterly 1511-1530.
54. Sunter, AF, ‘TWAIL as Naturalized Epistemological Inquiry’ (2007) 20 Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 475-510.
55. The International Court of Justice, Military and Paramilitart Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States, 1986, ICJ Rep. 12, ttps://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/70/070-19860627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf, erişim tarihi: 18.11.2020.
56. Uğurlu, G, ‘Uluslararası Hukuka Üçüncü Dünya Yaklaşımları’, (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Uluslararası İlişkiler Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, 2012.
57. Weeramantry, C, Islamic Jurisprudence: An International Perspective (Macmillan’s 1988)
58. Weeramantry, C, Universalising International Law (Martinus Nijhoff 2004).
59. Verzijl, JHW., International Law in Historical Perspective Vol I (AW Sijthoff 1968).