Social Practices of Rule-Making in the Interwar Period
This chapter questions standard interpretations of the interwar period as one of failed utopianism. It demonstrates that the Locarno agreements and especially the Kellogg-Briand Pact were part of a larger rule system originating in the late nineteenth century that sought to curtail the state’s right to use force. In particular, it shows that secondary rules can create unintended outcomes. Neither Kellogg nor Briand sought to create a multilateral treaty banning war except in self-defense and collective security. Rather, in seeking to manipulate procedural rules to force each other into abandoning the treaty, both men came to genuinely embrace it. This norm clearly informed subsequent state practice, despite being imperfectly adhered to, and was reasserted in the UN Charter. The case also shows the robustness of social practices of rule-making, which were adhered to consistently even by new states like Japan and states like the Soviet Union that had renounced international institutions.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.