Part 6 (1/2)

-- 29. Communities not fully Civilized

While there is no agreement as to what const.i.tutes civilization, still international law is considered as binding only upon states claiming a high degree of enlightenment. Communities, whether or not politically organized and not within the circle of states recognized by international law, because they are not regarded as sufficiently civilized, are not treated as without rights. It is held that these communities not fully civilized should be treated as civilized states would be treated so far as the time and other circ.u.mstances permit.

Unduly severe measures, whether in war or peace, should not be used by civilized states in dealing with those not civilized. It may be necessary that barbarians should be used as auxiliary forces in contests with barbarians, but it is now held that such forces should be officered and controlled by the civilized state. Extreme measures, in the way of devastation and destruction, have been used with the idea of impressing upon the minds of barbarians respect for the power of a state, but it is now questioned how far this is fitting for states claiming civilization.

Many states not admitted to the circle of nations have now acquired such a status as ent.i.tles them to the general privileges of international law to the extent to which their action has not violated its provisions, and it is generally so accorded, as for many years to China, Persia, and other Asiatic states.

PART III

INTERNATIONAL LAW OF PEACE

CHAPTER VII

GENERAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF STATES

30. +Existence.+

31. +Independence.+

32. +Equality.+

33. +Jurisdiction.+

34. +Property.+

35. +Intercourse.+

-- 30. Existence

The most comprehensive right of a state is the _right to exist_ as a sovereign political unity. From this comprehensive right flow the general rights of _independence_, _equality_, _jurisdiction_, _property_, and _intercourse_ and the obligations which the exercise of these rights imply. There are many cla.s.sifications of the general rights of states. During the eighteenth century a cla.s.sification into perfect and imperfect rights was common. A cla.s.sification based on the essential nature of the state as a sovereign political unity, having (1) a right to existence and (2) from the point of view of international law, having relations to other states, has been widely followed. The rights based on the comprehensive right to existence were variously named as essential, fundamental, primitive, innate, absolute, permanent, etc., while the rights derived from the practice of states in their mutual relations were called accidental, derived, secondary, acquired, relative, contingent, etc. The view now most generally recognized is that from the single comprehensive right of states _to exist_, all other rights flow, and all other rights are therefore related, if not directly, at least by virtue of their common source.

-- 31. Independence

Independence from the point of view of international law is freedom from external political control. While all states possessing freedom from external political control may not be admitted to the family of states, yet in order that a state may be admitted, it is regarded as essential that it be independent. The recognition of a state carries with it the recognition of independence. However, from the fact that there are states in the world having equal rights to independence, it follows that the field of action of each state is limited by the necessity of respect for the right of independence belonging to other states.

The recognition of a state presupposes autonomy as an essential for the existence of a sovereign political unity, and autonomy implies the right to determine and pursue such lines of action as may be in accord with its policy.

-- 32. Equality

All states, the existence of which has been recognized by the family of states, are regarded as possessed of equal rights in political affairs, so far as legal competence is concerned.