International Law: To Comply, or Not to Comply

The School of Diplomacy and International Relations recently announced the publication of a new book by Philip Moremen, J.D., Ph.D, associate professor and department chair. Perceptions of State: The U.S. State Department and International Law, was published in June by Cambridge University Press. In Perceptions of State, Moremen seeks to answer a question that students and scholars of international relations often grapple with: ‘’Why and to what extent, are states more or less likely to comply with international law?’’

Through interviews with some 80 senior officials from the United States Department of State, across five administrations, Moremen provides readers with a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the considerations that the U.S. and other nations take into account when deciding whether and to what extent to comply and the circumstances in which compliance is more or less likely.

When asked about his writing process, Moremen, revealed that the book project had been in the works for a long time. His interest in compliance began during graduate school and was the focus of his doctoral dissertation. Moremen, who earned his doctorate at Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy preceded by a J.D. from UCLA School of Law, went on to publish a number of articles on the topic. Perceptions of State was inspired by the idea “that one way to examine compliance was from the perspective officials who experience the intersection of international law and policy as practitioners," Moremen explains.

One of the School of Diplomacy's founding faculty members, Moremen spent time over the last decade managing interviews, gathering and analyzing data and drawing conclusions from his research. One of the most challenging aspects of writing the book, he explained, was reaching out to high-profile officials and scheduling in-person meetings, whenever possible. The work was labor intensive and required a high level of organization. He structured the project using a standardized questionnaire for all of the participant, and then coded the interviews quantitatively and qualitatively. Since high-level officials are often wary about recorded interviews, he opted to take notes. The approach allowed Professor Moremen to draw out more information from his interviewees, who as he predicted “would be more open if I simply took notes rather than record them."

Moremen’s research identified that the primary drivers of compliance included reputational concerns, an interest in a stable legal institutional system, the threat of retaliation by other states and ethical considerations. Factors such as state interest, the ambiguity of international law, sovereignty concerns and an unwillingness by rogue states to adhere to international law worked against compliance. Among the most interesting results he found was the prominent role of ethical considerations, which have been of high importance for the United States.

Moremen provides readers with narratives from officials through a deep investigation of the State Department’s culture and the role of international law in the department’s decision-making. He concludes with a look at the effect that the Trump administration has had on the culture and processes of the department.

“Most former officials expressed the opinion that international law constrains state behavior and that states generally comply with international law.” That is a key takeaway of Moremen’s findings. However, he cautions that this does not imply that international law necessarily controls state actors. He explains, “Governments do take into consideration other factors, especially national interest and depending on the particular situation, that can result in more or less compliance with international law. It's not a binary question- we comply or we don't comply. I think it's sometimes we comply more than other times and maybe even occasionally we don't comply."

Categories: Law