Trump defies international law and embraces might-makes-right | Opinion
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the defense of President Trump’s invasion of Venezuela, and his repeated threats to seize Greenland, the semiautonomous Danish territory, was the obliteration by Stephen Miller of the philosophy of the rules-based international order, which the United States played a leading role in creating in the closing days of World War II.
In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Miller, a top White House adviser, dismissed the international law treaty guarantees of the right of nations to self-determination, territorial sovereignty and independence, as “legal niceties.” Miller declared: “We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of times.”
As Miller explained it, in terms reinforced by the White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, if President Trump wants Greenland, he can simply take it. “Nobody,” Miller said, “is going to fight the United States militarily.”
Message to Greenlanders: So much for your right to independence and self-governance. Message to Americans: The ends justify the means.
Miller’s dark, cynical view would unravel the world order and, in the event of military strikes against Greenland, it would destroy NATO, roughly 80 years after it was created to protect Europe from Russian, not American, aggression. Miller’s view is not new, but rather one of ancient vintage. It reflects the singular assertion and projection of raw, brutal power — might makes right — which dominated the Old World before the desire among nations to create a civilized order led to the establishment of international law which, among other things, sought to restrain warfare and promote peace and stability.
Miller’s platform is grounded in Thucydides’ classic, “The Peloponnesian War,” in which he described the war between Athens and Sparta (431-404 BCE), and revealed the savage world of power politics in the Athenians’ demand to the Melians that they join their empire, or face destruction. In the realm of international relations, the Athenians stated, “the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”
Might makes right; justice only truly applies between equals. In such a world, the weak must submit to the demands of the strong, or they will face destruction, as the Melians did, when their men were killed and children and women were enslaved.
It was this international relations philosophy that the first writers on the Law of Nations — now International Law — sought to eclipse in the early 17th Century. European commentators — Vattel, Grotius and Bynkershoek, among others — introduced legal principles and practices to govern foreign affairs, the exchange of ambassadors, treaties and trade arrangements, the use of military force, and rules governing the high seas.
This historic campaign to develop a legal order from the chaos and brutality that enveloped the international realm was undertaken through treaties and international conventions, customs and usage, and the generally accepted principles of law and equity.
America’s founders rejected the Old World and embraced the New World. The aborning world of legal norms, conventions and aspirations found a suitemate in America. Legalism, after all, was a dominant part of our culture since birth. For the founders, constitutionalism applied to both the domestic and foreign realms. The Swiss citizen, Vattel, an authoritative influence on the founding generation, infused our colonists with lessons, for example, about the right of self-determination. Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson and Franklin quoted from his seminal work, The Law of Nations (1758), which they invoked as their Bible on questions of international law.
Those who wrote the Constitution signaled America’s commitment to international law by incorporating it into our domestic law. The right of self-determination, extended to all nations, was integral to our creation. Treaties guaranteeing our sovereign rights were not mere “legal niceties,” but rather essential legal instruments necessary for our independence, protection and growth.
The role of law as a foundational underpinning of American foreign policy was reinforced in the context of World War II and its aftermath. America can be justly proud of its leading role in the creation of the world order that has been integral to world peace. Americans, contrary to Trump’s misstatements, were the beneficiaries of NATO support when allies, in accordance with Article V, rushed to our side when al-Qaida, led by Osama bin Laden, attacked the U.S. on 9/11.
International laws should be honored, not cynically dismissed as “niceties.”
David Adler, Ph.D., is president of The Alturas Institute, created to defend American democracy by advancing the Constitution, civic education, equal protection and gender equality.