In ancient world of the Middle East, between 1500 and 500 years before the birth of Christ, a common great civilization occurred and dominated the area from the Tigris – Euphrates (Babylon) to the Nile (Egypt) and beyond. The choice then was between empire and chaos – just as in nature one empire fell giving rise to another. The empires of Alexander, the Romans, Chinese and the Mogul empire in India operated not on the basis of international relations but on conquest. There could be no relation between civilization and barbarism. Even up to the 17th century in Europe the accepted concepts was that of a universal empire and not the coexistence of sovereign states. It was not until the consolidation of the French, English and Spanish national states in opposition to the universal Holy Roman Empire that the idea of the proper mode of relations between sovereign states began to evolve.
Two philosophers, Jean Bodin (C1530-1596) and Hugo Grotius (Huig Van Gruit) (1538-1645) were the first two people to properly articulate the underlying philosophy that should guide the relations among states. This is not to forget that before them Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) had something profound to say about interstate relations even though tangentially. This Italian diplomat and writer, the son of a prosperous Florentine lawyer, had in one of his books 11 Principe written in 1513 but published in 1532 said that the prince even in his foreign relations need not be bound by covenants entered to solemnly by him. He was also not bound by promises made as long as he concentrated on the end in view since the end would justify whatever means he adopted for political and territorial aggrandisement of his state. Machiavelli is not usually known for his contribution to the evolution of politics among nations but his amoral ideas have no doubt influenced politicians since the 15th century.
Jean Bodin was a lawyer and an attorney to King Henry 111 of France. Writing against the background of Machiavellian philosophy, he insisted that the sovereign has an obligation to keep faith in treaties and alliances and should not for political expediency repudiate treaties solemnly entered into if the international system were not to dissolve into anarchy. This identified need for restraining absolute sovereign in their international dealings influenced Hugo Grotius, 50 years later, to carry forward the philosophy of Jean Bodin. Hugo Grotius was an international jurist, born in the Netherlands and practised law in The Hague and held at various times diplomatic positions on behalf of the French and Dutch governments. He was finally appointed ambassador to France by the Swedish government. In his book De Jure belli et Pacis (1625), he advocated that sovereign states should coexist in amity and peace with one another through the restraints of international law and existing norms that govern relations among states. His importance in the history of jurisprudence rests not on constitutional law but upon his conception of a law regulating the relations between sovereign states.
The practical urgency of the problem in the 17th century laid in the chaos associated with the rejection of the universalism of the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church and the wars of religion which followed the Counter Reformation. The wars of religion brought to international relations, the intrinsic bitterness of religious hatred and afforded the colour of good conscience to the most barefaced schemes of dynastic aggrandisement.
Coupled with this was the economic imperative which led the western European nations along the road of expansion, colonisation, commercial aggrandisement and the exploitation of newly discovered territories. Hugo Grotius claimed there was an immutable law of nature which governed relations between sovereign and subject and one government and the other. This law of nature was the fundamental basis of the civil law of every nation and this civil law was reflected in the laws binding every nation. The originality of this classical idea of natural law which had been discussed by Plato (C427-347BC), Aristotle (384-322BC), the stoics and Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43BC), was that Grotius believed that the same intrinsic principles are fundamental to the behaviour of states in their relations with one and the other. One of the most significant contributions of Hugo Grotius was his elucidation of the concept of extra territoriality, otherwise known as diplomatic immunity which was originated by the French jurist Pierre Ayraut (1536-1601). This concept was further developed by Samuel von Pufendorf (1632-1694), and by the 18th century the idea of diplomatic immunity had taken firm root and this concept of immunity was formally consolidated by the Vienna Convention of 1961. The idea that what binds human beings together on an individual basis can be transposed to relations between nations can be seen also in David Hume’s (1711-1776) A Treatise of Human Nature when he wrote, describing the basis of human relations and collaboration in founding civilized societies.
“I observe that it will be for my interest to leave another in the possession of his goods provided he will act in the same manner with regard to me. He is sensible of a like interest in the regulation of his conduct. When this common sense of interest is mutually expressed, and is known to both, it produces a suitable resolution and behaviour. And this may properly enough be called a convention or agreement betwixt us, though without the interposition of a promise since the actions of each of us have a reference to those of the other, and are performed upon the supposition that something is to be performed by the other party … assures us still more that the sense of interest has become common to all our fellows, and gives us a confidence of the future regularity of their conduct: and it is only on the expectation of this that our moderation and abstinence are founded”.
It is this logic of rule governing not only an individual behaviour but state behaviour that underpins the working of international relations.