At the vanishing point of international law: a classical realist analysis of arms control and disarmament

This thesis addresses the questions that the laws of war present as the vanishing point of international law, wherein they are subject to the forces of political and national interests, and examines the limits of the law as seen through arms control and disarmament treaties. It does this through the use and employment of international law and international relations theory, focusing primarily on what international law can achieve when regulating heavily political issues. The research conducted in this thesis is guided by the following three questions: a) Why and how did an international legal regime emerge in relation to arms control and disarmament? b) Has this international legal regime been successful in maintaining a taboo over the use of biological, chemical, nuclear, and conventional weapons? c) How can instances of failure to observe the taboo be best explained? This thesis is, therefore, an investigation into the 'how' and 'why' of the laws of arms control and disarmament and, more particularly, into the relevance of the principle inter arma enim silent lēgēs-in times of war the laws are silent. It confronts the prevailing analysis of the international laws of arms control and disarmament, deepening it through the application of classical realist scholarship, as well as the notion that the way we conventionally think about international law is in need of serious revision. The usage of the works of E.H. Carr, Hans J. Morgenthau, and Georg Schwarzenberger allows for new insights which would otherwise not be possible. The works and theories of these three theorists allow us to think through the implications of eroded taboos by political necessity and what it means for the fabric and overriding logic of international society. By employing them, this thesis bridges the divide between international law and international relations scholarship, and benefits from the expertise of both of these fields.