1. Shi’s undergraduate studies

In June 1944, when Shi enrolled in St John’s University in Shanghai, the city and the school had been substantially transformed by the Second World War. Shanghai was under Japanese occupation, while the US was at war with Japan after the latter’s attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. The university was the only Protestant Christian college remaining in Shanghai, but it was without any American faculty and staff because they were either repatriated as part of an exchange of civilians between the US and Japan or had been placed in internment camps by the end of February 1943. ^{Footnote 5} Shortly after Shi began his sophomore year in 1945, Japan surrendered on 15 August. After that, the American staff of the Protestant missions gradually returned to Shanghai. ^{Footnote 6}

Shi’s undergraduate studies were profoundly influenced by several significant and persistent challenges that affected Chinese students. Outside the university, reports of misbehaviour by American service members in China enraged the Chinese public and caused a public uproar. The situation was exacerbated when the US government resolved to give substantial American aid to help reconstruct a defeated Japan. These events offended the sensibilities of the Chinese people and ignited waves of anti-American activities on campus and beyond. ^{Footnote 7} In Shi’s senior year, his studies were frequently interrupted by student strikes and related protest activities. ^{Footnote 8}

Shi closely followed such news with a strong sense of justice and patriotism. In August 1946, he wrote a letter to a Shanghai newspaper and took issue with certain falsehoods that had been published in an earlier article. ^{Footnote 9} The writer of the contested article falsely claimed that ‘Foreigners [in China] are discriminated against here [in ways that] Chinese are not discriminated [against] in civilized countries, notably the States.’ ^{Footnote 10} Shi disagreed and challenged the veracity of the allegation, stating:

Notably, he did not contend that foreigners in China did not experience any discrimination at all, stating that ‘evidences of prejudice of foreigners may be found in every country’. ^{Footnote 12} Nonetheless, he championed an enlightened view in support of the equal treatment of people from all races because ‘after all we are all human beings which belong to the same genus and same species, i.e., Homo sapiens’. ^{Footnote 13} His open-minded views aligned with the international law theory he advocated in 1951 in his Masters’ thesis at Columbia.

It is against this historical backdrop that Shi pursued his undergraduate studies at St. Johns. While initially studying Chemistry with a view to joining his father in the chemical industry, ^{Footnote 14} he switched to political science after his first semester, being far more intrigued by the subject. ^{Footnote 15} Shi was exposed to a liberal arts education which proved instrumental in his future career in academia, diplomacy, and international organizations. In his first two years at St. John’s, Shi studied a variety of mandatory courses, including Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Chinese, English, History, Religion, and Philosophy. ^{Footnote 16} In his final two years, Shi focused primarily on political science courses as his major and Philosophy as a minor. ^{Footnote 17}

Shi’s time at St John’s allowed him to acquire solid foundational knowledge in international law and related subjects. Due to the onset of the Second World War, Shi was not able to receive instruction from American professors during his first two years, and instead was taught by two out of the three Chinese alumni professors in charge of international law and its related subjects. ^{Footnote 18}

One of them was Phen S-Tsu, also known as Pan Shizhi, who offered courses on public international law, history of political thought, criminal law, and international law (law of war), among others. ^{Footnote 19} Shi’s other professor, M. T. Z. Tyau, also known as Diao Minqian, taught courses that included constitutional law, international organizations, administrative law, diplomacy, and international law (law of peace). ^{Footnote 20} Tyau was one of the most accomplished academic international lawyers in China in that era with advanced legal education as well as experience as a legal adviser at China’s Foreign Ministry. ^{Footnote 21} He also authored several books and articles ^{Footnote 22} and was the first Chinese national to publish articles in the British Yearbook of International Law in 1922. ^{Footnote 23}

To better understand the preparatory education in political science and international law Shi received in China, it is crucial to examine the courses he studied at St John’s. He took four courses with Phen – jurisprudence, international law (law of peace), international law (law of war), and Russian government; five courses with Tyau – Principles of Political Government and Sciences, Government of England, Diplomacy, International Organization, and the History of Western Diplomacy; and two courses with foreign professors – History of Western Political Thought with Donald Roberts, and History of Church in China with Charles Elliott Perry. Both foreign professors were American missionary academics who had been with St. John’s for decades and had returned to the university after the war. Besides political science, Shi appeared to have a strong interest in philosophy and history. ^{Footnote 24} He had a great fondness for his philosophy professor Edmund Hwei Chi Hsu, also known as Xu Huaiqi, ^{Footnote 25} and he had taken four of his courses. Significantly, ^{Footnote 26} he studied French for a year which proved very useful in his subsequent graduate studies at Columbia because it allowed him to use French literature on international law for his research.

One event which would have been ripe for discussion was the election of ICJ judges in February 1946 as Chinese diplomat Hsu Mo had been chosen as one of the 15 inaugural judges.Footnote ²⁷ As victims of Japanese aggression, the Chinese people had high hopes for this judicial institution and had:

Shi undoubtedly explored the significance of this momentous occurrence with his professors at St. John’s.

After passing all exams, he was conferred the Bachelor of Arts in political science on 30 June 1948. ^{Footnote 29} After graduation, Shi applied to several schools for postgraduate studies,Footnote ³⁰ and ultimately decided to attend Columbia University in early 1949.

2. Shi’s postgraduate studies

Shi arrived in San Francisco in January 1949Footnote ³¹ and registered as a graduate student with the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University. ^{Footnote 32} While interested in international law, Shi did not attempt to go to law school because international law had ‘never occupied a prominent place in the curriculum of [American] law schools’. ^{Footnote 33} It had been generally studied ‘not only as a branch of law but as a branch of political science’. ^{Footnote 34} As part of his degree, Shi was required to submit a satisfactory degree thesis. He was to ‘discover, within the field of his primary interests, an appropriate subject upon which to write the required essay’ and consult with his supervisor about his proposed topic. ^{Footnote 35}

Shi’s undergraduate education in China had prepared him well to undertake further studies as an international law student. He not only satisfied the compulsory foreign language requirement for his graduate studies, ^{Footnote 36} but also completed a comprehensive examination that was designed to ‘test not only [his] general background of factual information in the social sciences but also his field of graduate concentration’. ^{Footnote 37}

While Shi was at Columbia, two leading specialists were mainly responsible for teaching and research supervision in international law. Philip C. Jessup was the Hamilton Fish Professor of International Law and Diplomacy, while Oliver J. Lissitzyn was an assistant professor of public law. During Shi’s enrollment, Jessup was appointed Ambassador-at-large by the US government in 1949 and only offered a course later in the spring session of that academic year. ^{Footnote 38} Consequently, Lissitzyn became Shi’s principal professor ^{Footnote 39} and thesis supervisor. ^{Footnote 40} Shi’s program of study at Columbia was hence put together in consultation with Lissitzyn who was also the departmental adviser in international relations and international law. ^{Footnote 41}

Lissitzyn was a very gifted international lawyer. ^{Footnote 42} He was a devoted teacher who had a strong interest in teaching students and often left an impact on their careers. ^{Footnote 43} He was known to ‘[n]ever [be] parochial in his outlook’ and one who ‘sought to understand diverse and hostile attitudes while seeking elements of common interest on which agreement might be achieved’. ^{Footnote 44} This was why he ‘inspired respect and affection’ from students of various nationalities and backgrounds. ^{Footnote 45}

When Shi was his student, Lissitzyn published a significant piece of work that inspired Shi. ^{Footnote 46} In this critically acclaimed monograph, Lissitzyn conducted a study to ‘appraise the Court as an instrument for the maintenance of international peace and security’. ^{Footnote 47} He addressed three crucial questions – in what ways can it help to avoid violence and war? What use has already been made of it? And what unused potential does it have? ^{Footnote 48} He offered the view that the answers to these and other related questions were found not only in the UN Charter and ICJ statute but also in ICJ’s record, which showed ‘the attitude of the various states and of the political organs of the United Nations toward its functions, and the place of law in international relations’. ^{Footnote 49} In his view, the most significant contribution the Court could make to the cause of peace at the time was ‘the development of international law through its activity’. ^{Footnote 50}

At Columbia, Shi took several courses on international law. One such course was International Law I, as taught by Professor Lissitzyn, which covered ‘[t]he principal features of international law as it developed and has been invoked in diplomatic practice, international adjudications, and national courts since the middle of the seventeenth century’. ^{Footnote 51} The course also aimed to examine ‘the defects and weakness of the international legal system; [and] trends in the law and its probable lines of development’. ^{Footnote 52} The knowledge from this course would lay the groundwork for Shi’s Master’s thesis research.

Another course was the Law of Treatises, also by Lissitzyn. This course covered the ‘role of international agreements in international relations’, the ‘position in international law of bipartite and multipartite agreements between international organizations’, ‘negotiation, conclusion, recordation, validity, interpretation, revision and termination of pubic international agreements’, ^{Footnote 53} as well as the ‘domestic position of treaties and executive agreements in the United States’. ^{Footnote 54} This would arguably be the first formal instruction that Shi obtained on the relationship between municipal law and international law in the US context. In addition, he would also have been given his first taste of ‘[p]roblems in the drafting of treaties’. ^{Footnote 55}

For classes on International Law, Lissitzyn prepared and distributed mimeographed copies of ‘Supplementary Cases and Materials on International Law’ (which spanned over 200 pages) to his students. ^{Footnote 56} This aimed to supplement the materials from H. W. Briggs’s ‘The Law of Nations’. ^{Footnote 57} The supplementary materials covered a broad range of issues in international law. They provided an excellent snapshot of the breadth and depth of what Lissitzyn taught and discussed with his students. For example, one case discussed the American practice in international law concerning the import-export clause in the Constitution, which prohibited individual states from taxing imports. ^{Footnote 58} The materials also covered the then-latest judicial decisions on issues arising from the legal implications of the US government’s recognition of Soviet Russia, ^{Footnote 59} the applicability of American laws to mandated territory, ^{Footnote 60} sovereignty immunity, ^{Footnote 61} expropriation for public utility, ^{Footnote 62} state responsibility, ^{Footnote 63} and the delimitation of boundaries. ^{Footnote 64} The claims of the United States with respect to the continental shelf and certain coastal fisheries were part of the discussion topics. ^{Footnote 65} Important international instruments, ^{Footnote 66} such as the Charter of the International Military Tribunal and its manifestation in the Nuremberg trials ^{Footnote 67} were included. Another example was the Hague Regulations of 1909, which focused on military authority over the territory of hostile states, and the Draft Convention on Rights and Duties of States in Case of Aggression. ^{Footnote 68}

During the two-and-a-half years Shi spent on his advanced research for the Master’s degree, he also undertook a course on Research in International Law with Lissitzyn, which was described as a course that allowed for ‘individual and group study of selected problems in international law’. ^{Footnote 69}

After consulting Lissitzyn, Shi decided to conduct research and write his Master’s thesis on the monistic theory of international law. Shi was particularly enamored with monism and ^{Footnote 70} sought to ‘make an investigation of this monistic conception of international law’. ^{Footnote 71} His choice of topic was not surprising, as intellectually curious students of international law were often fascinated by enduring questions such as, ‘Is there such a law as the law of nations? If so, what then is its real nature? Why [are] rules of international law … binding?’ ^{Footnote 72}

Shi was a pragmatist and acknowledged the limited potential monism as a novel conception of international law would achieve. It could not ‘have any immediate and appreciable effects on the practices employed [by] statesmen and foreign offices in their international relations’.Footnote ⁷³ However, he maintained that such research could serve a cautionary function – ‘jurists can at least remind statesmen of the world of the destructive and chaotic effects produced on relations among states by the predominance of false theories’.Footnote ⁷⁴ This remark seems to have been drawn from his own experience and that of his homeland as a victim of foreign aggression and the unjust extraterritoriality regime, which were undoubtedly catastrophic tragedies that laid bare the limitations and failure of international law and its institutions. Shi’s experience growing up in China while it was under strong foreign control and influence, during which China suffered through brutal Japanese aggression and the Second World War, must have contributed to his decision to undertake research on monism in international law. He must have been interested in producing a piece of scholarship that would be of value to maintain global peace and security, and advance and protect the interests of weaker states.

Shi’s thesis was completed in May 1951, consisting of 117 pages of research. As this thesis was never published and little is known about it, this work will be briefly explored. The main text of Shi’s Master’s thesis spanned seven chapters following a short introductory chapter, in which Shi generally espoused the traditional conception of sovereignty of states.Footnote ⁷⁵ However, Shi opined that the traditional conception of sovereignty of states was flawed in several aspects.Footnote ⁷⁶ These included, first, the positivist’s doctrinal articulation that ‘a state is not bound by any rule short of its consent, express or tacit’; second, the classical notion that a state is ‘in principle sole judge of the existence of any individual rules of law, applicable to itself’.Footnote ⁷⁷ He argued that these conceptions were untenable, and that ‘the law of nations cannot be built upon the foundations of the doctrine of the absolute will of states. Such an argument negates the very existence of law in the international community’.Footnote ⁷⁸ In the substantive chapters, Shi outlined various theories on the nature of international law. He expounded on the views of Léon Duguit, George Scelle, and Hugo Krabble concerning the foundation of international law. Next, Shi focused on the jurisprudence of the Vienna School with Hans Kelsen as the central figure in this inquiry. He also considered the writings of Alfred Verdross and Joseph L. Kunz who were well-known members of the Vienna School,Footnote ⁷⁹ before summarizing and concluding his research.

Shi summed up his research by recognizing that the ‘theories of international law of Duguit, George Scelle, Krabbe, and the Vienna School are part and parcel of their general theories of law’. ^{Footnote 80} In his opinion, these writers saw international law and municipal law as having the same provenance. While their theoretical discussions shared similarities in several respects, their doctrines were fundamentally different ^{Footnote 81} due to the divergent methodological approaches these writers adopted. Shi characterized the method of the Vienna School as ‘normative, pure and positive’, Duguit’s as ‘realistic’, and Krabbe’s as ‘theoretical but, unlike the Vienna School, Krabbe has ethical and political considerations’. ^{Footnote 82} In explaining the basis of international law, for Kelsen and the Vienna School, international law was based upon ‘a basic norm which is hypothetical’; for Verdoss it was ‘pacta sunt servanda’; for Kunz it was ‘grundnormgefüge’; for Duguit, it was ‘social solidarity’; and for Krabbe, it was ‘legal conscience.’ ^{Footnote 83}

Given the delineated scope of his research, Shi was cognizant that his thesis had not delved into the ‘controversial problem of the basis and the obligatory force of international law’. ^{Footnote 84} He made it clear that he did not intend to go into ‘a discussion as to what should be the real basis of the binding character of international law’ because his research was only intended to ‘emphasize that the monist theories … represent a movement against the untenable theses of the positivists of the 19^th century’. ^{Footnote 85} He did, however, reserve harsh words for the positivists of the nineteenth century, who ‘center[ed] their views on the law of nations on such catastrophic fictions of absolute sovereignty of state and the derivatives of that false conception of sovereignty such as “auto-limitation”, etc.’. ^{Footnote 86} In contrast, he had high hopes for the monist theory of international law to facilitate global peace and harmony:

In totality, Shi’s thesis demonstrates that he had studied the principal writings on monism and dualism in international law with great care. He was careful and thoughtful in arranging and presenting the related theories and materials, and he stated some of the views expressed by these leading authors with admirable clarity and accuracy. Furthermore, his French proficiency empowered him to draw on literature in French, which he read industriously and carefully, and which was used discerningly in many parts of the thesis. What is most praiseworthy is that he critically analysed and made several contributions to monism that remain relevant even today.

A month after the thesis’s submission, Shi received the degree of Master of Arts in Public Law and Government at the Commencement Exercises of Columbia University held on 7 June 1951. ^{Footnote 88} After graduating, he continued his research of international law as a PhD student under Lissitzyn until January 1954. In late June 1954, he boarded the steamer President Cleveland and departed for home, intending to join the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or pursue an academic career. ^{Footnote 89} The subsequent chapters of his fruitful and accomplished life are generally well-known.Footnote ⁹⁰