1 See e.g., Hart, H. L. A. International Law, in The Concept of Law (rev. ed. 1994)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations of International Law and Politics [hereinafter Foundations] at 136; Thomas, M. Franck Fairness in International Law and Institutions (1995)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 152.

2 See, e.g., Chayes, Abram & Antonia, H. Chayes The New Sovereignty (1995), excerpted in foundations, at 174 Google Scholar; Mary, Ellen O’Connell New International Legal Process, 93 AJIL 334 (1999)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 191; Harold Hongju, Koh Why Do Nations Obey? 106 Yale L.J. 2599 (1997)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 195.

3 An early, valuable contribution in this regard is Ann-Marie Slaughter, Burley International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda, 87 AJIL 205 (1993).Google Scholar

4 Finnemore, Martha National Interests in International Society (1996), excerpted in Foundations at 112 Google Scholar; see also Wendt, Alexander The Structure-Agent Problem in International Relations, Int’l Org. 1 (1987), at 335 Google Scholar; Anarchy, Wendt Is What States Make of It, 46 Int’l Org. 391 (1992)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 127-32; Checkel, Jeffrey The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, 50 World Pol. 324 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 In his Fourteen Points speech to Congress in 1918, President Wilson set out a number of the pillars supporting the idealists’ agenda for peace, including self-determination, open diplomacy, national reductions in armaments, freedom of the seas, free trade, and an end to colonization. U.S. Department of State, President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points, in 45 The Papers of Woodrow Wilson 536 (Arthur, S. Link et al. eds., 1984).Google Scholar Among the proponents of the “idealist school” are pacifists, world federalists, humanitarians, legalists, and moralists.

6 See, e.g., Russell, Bertrand Has Man A Future? (1962)Google Scholar; Clark, Grenville & Sohn, Louis World Peace Through World Law: Two Alternative Plans (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Richard, A. Falk A Study of Future Worlds (1975).Google Scholar

7 The lone exception is Jack Goldsmith and Stephen Krasner’s contribution, The Limits of Idealism, 132 Daedalus 47 (2003)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 350.

8 Moravcsik, Andrew The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe, 45 Int’l Org. 217 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, excerptedm Foundations at 206.

9 Akahavan, Payam Beyond Impunity: Can International Criminal Justice Prevent Future Atrocities? 95 AJIL 7 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 340.

10 See the contributions by Jeffrey Michael Smith, by Susan Esserman and Robert Howse, by Joost Pauwelyn, and by Warren Schwartz and Alan Sykes in Foundations at 272-306.

11 See the contributions by Peter Haas, by Detlef Sprinz and Tapani Vaahtoranta, and by Daniel Bodansky in Foundations at 242-71.

12 See the contributions by Louis Henkin, Jules Lobel, and Kenneth Abbott in Foundations at 307-38.

13 Eckersley, Robyn Soft law, Hard Politics, and the Climate Change Treaty, in The Politics of International Law 80 [hereinafter Politics].Google Scholar

14 Price, Richard Emerging Customary Norms and Anti-personnel Landmines, in Politics 106.Google Scholar

15 Gurowitz, Amy International Law, Politics, and Migrant Rights, in Politics 131.Google Scholar

16 Wippman, David The International Criminal Court, in Politics 151 Google Scholar.

17 Wheeler, Nicholas The Kosovo Bombing Campaign, in Politics 189.Google Scholar

18 Anghie, Anthony International Financial Institutions, in Politics 217.Google Scholar

19 See Hans, Joachim Morgenthau Politics . Among Nations (5th ed. 1978)Google Scholar (first edition published 1948), excerpted in Foundations at 31; Edward Hallett, Carr The Twenty Years’ Crisis (1940)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 280; Nicholas John, Spykman The Geography of the Peace (Helen, R. Nicholl ed., 1944)Google Scholar; Niebuhr, Reinhold The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness: A Vindication of Democracy and A Critique of its Traditional Defence (1944)Google Scholar; Kennan, George Realities of American Foreign Policy (1954).Google Scholar

20 See Foundations at 173-204; see also Finnamore, Martha & Sikkink, Kathryn International Norm Dynamics and Political Change, 52 Int’l Org. 887 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 See FOUNDATIONS at 273-304.

22 See Waltz, Kenneth Theory Of International Politics (1979).Google Scholar

23 A notable group of thinkers contributed to liberalism’s philosophical roots, among them Immanuel Kant, John Locke, and Adam Smith.

24 For liberal arguments, see Doyle, Michael Liberalism and World Politics, 80 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 1151 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moravcsik, Andrew Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Relations, 51 Int’l Org. 513 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 It should be noted that neoliberals agree that certain key assumptions of realism are accurate: for one, the international system is anarchic, which hinders intergovernmental cooperation; for another, states (administered by their governments) are the central actors in international relations; and third, inquiry into the ways and means of international politics must be guided by a rationalist approach. See Robert Keohane, After Hegemony (1984); Robert Keohane & Joseph Nye, Power and Interdependence (1977).

26 Moravcsik, supra note 8.

27 Hathaway, Oona The Promise and Limits of the International Law of Torture, in Torture: A Collection 199 (Levinson, Sanford ed., 2004)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 228.

28 Haas, Peter Banning Chlorofluorocarbons: Epistemic Community Efforts to Protect Stratospheric Ozone, 46 Int’l Org. 187 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 243.

29 Smith, Jeffrey Three Models of Judicial Institutions in International Organizations: The European Union, the United Nations, and the World Trade Organization, 10 Tulsaj. Comp. & Int’l L. 115 (2002)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 243.

30 Kenneth, W. Abbott International Relations Theory, International Law, and the Regime Governing Atrocities in Internal Conflicts, 93 AJIL 361 (1999)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 324.

31 See supra notes 13, 14, 18.

32 See John Gerard, Ruggie What Makes the World Hang Together: Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge, 52 Int’l Org. 855 (1998)Google Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 120; Wendt, Alexander Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics, 46 Int’l Org. 391 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, excerpted in Foundations at 127.

33 See Austin, John Lecture 1, in Lectures on Jurisprudence 86 (Campbell, R. ed., 5th ed. 1875).Google Scholar

34 For critiques of theorizing in international relations, see Snyder, Jack One World, Rival Theories, Foreign Pol’y, Nov./Dec. 2004, at 145 Google Scholar; Lepgold, Joseph Is Anyone Listening? International Relations Theory and the Problem of Policy Relevance, 113 Pol. Sci. Q. 43 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kahler, Miles Inventing International Relations: International Relations Theory After 1945, in New Thinking in International Relations Theory 20 (Doyle, Michael & G. John, Ikenberry eds., 1997)Google Scholar; Lamborn, Alan Theory and the Politics in World Politics, 41 Int’l Studies Q. 187 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; William, T. R. Fox The Uses of International Relations Theory, in Theoretical Aspects of International Relations 29 (William, T. R. Fox ed., 1957).Google Scholar