kleingeld, pauline (1998). kant´s cosmopolitan law

8/12/2019 Kleingeld, Pauline (1998). Kant´s Cosmopolitan Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kleingeld-pauline-1998-kants-cosmopolitan-law 1/19

Kant s Cosmopolitan Law:

World Citizenship for a Global Order

PAULINE KLEINGELD

Washington University St Louis

I n d e b a t e s o v e r t h e c o n d i t i o n s fo r a j u s r wor ld order , o n e h e a r s

f r e q u e n t a p p e a l s t o K a n t ' s ca l l fo r s t a te s to un i t e i n a f e d e r a t i o n . '

G i v e n t h e f o r c e o f K a n e ' s a r g u m e n t s a n d t h e i r i n f l u e n c e o n t h e s h a p e

o f s u c h i n s t i t u t i o n s a s t h e L e a g u e o f N a t i o n s a n d t h e U n i te d N a t i o n s ,

t h i s is c e r t a i n l y j u s t i f i e d . B u t a n e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f w h a t K a n t s a w a s

ne c e s s a r y for a g l o b a l l e g a l o rd e r is u s u a l l y n e g l e c t e d . W h a t is over-

l o o k e d i s K a n t ' s e m p h a s i s o n t h e s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s u n d e r w h a t lieca l l s ' c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w ' .2 C o s m o p o l i t a n l a w i s c o n c e rn e d n o t w i t h

t h e i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n s t a t e s , b u t w i t h th e s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s in

t h e i r d e a l i n g s w i t h s ta t e s o f w h i c h t h e y a r e n o t c i t i ze ns . Moreover, i t

is concerned w i th th e s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s a s h u m a n beings , r a t h e r

t h a n a s c i t i ze ns o f s t a t e s . I n K a n t ' s p o l i t i c a l t h e o r y , c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w

(Welibiirgerrecht) i s t h e t h i rd c a t e g o ry o f p u b l i c law, in a d d i t i o n to

c o n s t i t u t i o n a l la w a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l law.3 I ts core i s w h a t K a n t c a l ls a

r i g h t to h o s p i t a l i t y . H e a rg u e s t h a t s t a t e s a n d i n d i v i d u a l s h a v e th e

r i g h t t o a t t e m p t to e s t a b l i s h r e l a t i o n s w i t h o t h e r s t a t e s a n d t h e i r

c i t i z e n s , b u t no t a r i g h t to e n t e r f o r e i g n te r r i t o r y . S t a t e s h a v e th e r i g h t

to re fuse v i s i to rs , b u t n o t v i o l e n t l y , and no t i f i t l e a d s to t h e i r

d e s t r u c t i o n . This i m p l i e s a n o b l i g a t i o n t o r e f r a i n f ro m i m p e r i a l i s t

i n t r u s i o n s a n d t o p ro v id e s a f e h a v e n f o r r e f u g e e s .

K a n t ' s c o n c e p t o f c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w m e r i t s a l l t h e m o re a t t e n t i o n

b e c a u s e it i l l u m i n a t e s recent changes in the s t a t u s o f ind iv idua l s

u n d e r i n t e r n a t i o n a l law. T h i s s t a t u s h a s b e e n s t r e n g t h e n e d

s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h i s c e n t u r y , b u t t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f r h e d e v e l o p m e n t

has no t been s u f f i c i e n t l y r e c o g n i z e d in p o l i t i c a l t h e o ry .In th is essay, I a r g u e t h a t K a n t ' s concept o f co smo p o l i t an l a w no t

o n l y r e p re s e n t s a m o r e i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f K a n t ' s p o l i t i c a l t h e o r y t h a n

i s u s u a l l y a c kn o w l ed g e d b u t a l s o p ro v i d e s a n i n t e r e s t i n g K a n t i a n

72 KANTIAN REVIEW VOLUME Z I99B



PAULINE KLEINGELD

b e tw e e n i n t e r n a t i o n a l a n d c o s m o p o l i ta n l a w c a n b e d e fe n d ed a n d

t h a t die latter c a n b e i n s t it u t i o n a l i z e d , a t least to a degree , w i t h o u t

e m b r a c i n g the idea l of a single wo r l d r e p u b l i c . In t h e co u r se o f this

d i s c u s s i o n it wi l l also become clear tha t Kan t ' s concep t ion of

c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w i s b y n o m e a ns an ins ign i f ican t appendag e . Ind eed ,

it is d e c id e d l y r e l e v a n t to r e ce n t d e v e l o p m e n t s in i n t e r n a t i o n a l la w .

Kant's Cosmopolitan L a w: Its Addressees, Content and

Justification

Addressees

A s e a r l y a s 181)0, W i l h e h n Traugott K r u g f o r m u l a t e d th e f o l l o w i n g

a b j e c t i o n :

Cosmopolitan law, which people have recently in t roduced as a dis t inct p a r t

of publ ic law, is really only a p a r t of in ternat ional law, or rathe r one singleproblem of the lat ter , a problem tha t is i m p o r t an t e n o u g h , bu t tha i doesnot deserve to be l is ted un de r a t i t l e o f its o w n , as i f it were a sepa ra t e

p a r t . '

A t f i r s t sight, K r u g seems to have a point. A f t e r all, ic is s ta tes, no t

i n d i v i d u a l s , w h o m a k e t r e a t i e s tegarding a m b a s s a d o r s , trade

a g r e e m e n t s , and the like, it s e e m s t h a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l in t e r a c t io n fa l l s

u n d e r i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w a n d that n o t h i n g w a r r a n t s i n v e n t i n g a n e w

sphere o f p u b l i c la w .F o r Ka n t , h o we v e r , th e answer l i e s in the d i f fe rence in addressees

b e t we e n i n t e r n a t i o n a l and co sm o p o l i t a n law. A cco r d i n g to the

t r a d i t i o n a l v i e w, shared b y K a n t , i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w is th e l a w b e twe e n

sta tes . B y contrast, i n c o s m o p o l i ta n law, ' i nd iv id ua l s and states, w h o

s t a n d in an exte rna l r e l a t ionsh ip o f m u t u a l i nf lu e n c e , a re regarded a s

c i t izens o f a u n i v e r s a l state o f h u m a n k i n d (allgemeiner Menschen-

slaat) (ius cosmopoliticum) (P P 8: 349n.)-8 In th e Metaphysics of

Morals, K a n t m e n t io n s na t ions and ' c i t i zens o f t he earth' (Ereburger)

(M M 6: 353) as b e a r e r s of c o s m o p o l i t a n rights. ' Thus c o s m o p o l i t a nla w addresses s t a t e s and individuals, a d d t e s s i n g i n d i v id u a l s a s

' c i t i zens o f the e a r t h ' r a t h e r t h a n a s c i t i z ens o f a p a r t i c u l a r s t a t e .

I n d e p e n d e n t l y o f t h e i r n a t i o n a l i t y , a l l h u m a n s a r e w o r ld c i t i zens .10

This a n s w e r s K r u g ' s o b j e c t i o n a n d w a r r a n t s d r a w i n g a d i s t i n c t i o n

b e t w e e n i n t e r n a t i o n a l la w a n d c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w , a t l e a s t a s l o n g a s

71 KANTIAN REVIEW. VOLUME Z I5?8



KANTS COSMOPOLITAN LAW

one conceives of i n t e r n a t i o n a l l aw as law be tween states, w h ich is howit h a s t r a d i t i o n a l l y b ee n c o n c e i v e d . B e f o re a d d r e s s in g th e p r ob l e m o f

th e i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f cosmopolitan l a w , I m u s t s ay m o r e about it s

contents a n d K a n t 's j u s t i f ic a t i o n .

Content

C o s m o p o l i t a n la w is con ce r n e d w i t h in t e r a c t i on (Verkehr) across

borders. I t co v e rs a n y k i n d o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , i n t e r a c t i o n , trade, o t

b u s i n e s s . I t a p p l i e s to t r a ve l , m i g r a ti o n , i n t e l le c t u a l e x c h a n g e , a s we l l

as to c o m m e r c ia l endeavours."

The content of cos m opo l i t a n law is the r ight to hospitality:

' C o s m o p o l i t a n la w sha l l b e l im i t e d t o t he c o n d i t i o n s o f u n i v e r s a l

h o s p i t a l i t y ' (P P 8 : 357). K a n t e m p l o y s a m i n i m a l a n d n e g a t iv e concept

of hos p i t a l i t y , as ' the r igh t of a stranger not to be t rea ted w i t h

h o s t i l i t y b e c a u s e of h i s a r r i v a l o n s o m e o n e e ls e's s o i l ' (PP 8: 358). It is

m e r e l y a r i g h t to v i s i t, w h i c h K a n t u n d e r s t a n d s a s t he r i g h t to p r e s e n t

oneself and to try to e s t a b l is h con t a c t s w i t h pe op l e and s ta tes in other

p a r t s of t he world. Thus, d e s p i t e th e te rm ' h o s p i t a l i t y right', it is

e m p h a t i c a l l y no t a r i g h t to be t r e a t e d a s a g u e s t , A state has the r i g h t

to d e n y a vis i t , a s l on g as i t does so non-v io l en t l y . And i n d i v i d u a l sha ve the r i g h t to present themselves, not the r i g h t a c t u a l l y to visit

w i t h o t h e r s , s i n c e t h e o t h e r s a t e f ree t o d e c l i n e t h e r e q u e s t (M M 6 :

352). As K a n t pu t s i t in Perpetual Peace: it is a r igh t to ' ap proa ch ' , no t

to ' e n t r y ' (Zwgtf ' ig no t Emg rmg ) (PP 8: 359). Visi tors d o n o t have a

g e n e r a l r i g h t t o be s u p p o r te d , t o be t a k e n in , or to be t o l e r a t e d b y a

fore ign state a n y longer t h a n it t a ke s t he m to t u r n a r o u n d a n d leave.

Na t ion a l s ove r e ign t y s e t s l im i t s to the t rave l l ing wor ld citizen.12

F i n a l l y , no one has a right to settle on the soi l of a n o t h e r pe op l e ; t h is

r i g h t ca n on l y b e e s t a b l i s h e d t h r o u g h a t r e a t y . Ka n t ' s t a r ge t s a re

o b v i o u s : m u c h of h is t r e a t m e n t o f cosmopolitan law is a strong

c r i t iq u e o f c o l o n i a l is m .

I n c i d e n t a l l y , t h e f ac t t h a t K a n t m e n t io n s t h a t o n e c a n on l y set t le i n

l a n d a l r e a d y o c cu p i e d o r u s e d t h r o u g h a t rea ty is in te res t ing g iven the

in t e l l e c t ua l c l im a t e of th e t im e . Ka n t s t a n ds o u t a m ids t e igh t e e n t h -

c e n t u r y p h i l o s o p h e r s w h o d i s c u s s t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r o n e n e e d e d t o

or e v e n c o u l d h a v e , tteaties w i t h p e o p l e w h o h a d n o t y e t f o r m e d a

state, a nd w h e t h e r 'savages' a re capable o f f o r m in g t r e a ti e s in the f irs t

place. K a n t h e r e n o t o n l y g r o u n d s h is d i f f e t en t v i ew in hi s t h e o r y o f

p r o p e r t y r igh t s , w h i c h , in contrast t o L o c k ea n a p p r o a c h e s , a l l o w s h i mt o s ay that n o m a d s h a v e a r i g h t f u l cla im to l a n d . H e a l s o a f f i r m s t h a t

KANTIAN REVIEW. VOLUME I 1996 75



PAULINE KLEINGELD

a n y o n e , w h e t h e r B r i t o r ' H o t t e n t o t ' , i s t he p o t e n t i a l s u b j e c t o f

covenants, a nd t he b e a re r o f c e r t a in b a s i c r i g h t s .3 3

Lim i t ing its c o n t e n t to hosp i ta l i t y r igh t s seems to m a k e

c o s m o p o l i t a n la w ve r y l im i t e d ind e e d . B u t i t h a s b r o a d e r i m p l i c a t i o n s

t h a n o n e e x p e c t s a t f i r s t . W h e t h e r o r n o t h e i n t e n d s i t , K a n t does

defend a r i g h t t h a t u n d e r c e r ta i n c i r c u m s t a n ce s is e v e n broader t h a n a

r i g h t to p o l i ti c a l a s y l u m , inc l u d ing p ro te c t io n f ro m s t a rv a t io n o r fa t a l

d i s e a s e . H e a r g u e s t h a t a state m a y r e f u s e a v is i to r only 'when i t canh a p p e n w i t h o u t his d e s t r u c t i o n ' (Untergang, PP 8 : 358). This p r i n c i p l e

h a s s i g n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s . W h e n r e f u s i n g a p e r s o n a t the b o r d e r is

i m p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t th e person be ing k i l l ed , a d m i s s i o n i s o b l ig a t o ry .

A n d o n e c a n n o t l e g i t i m a t e l y send a p e r s o n b a c k to a c o u n t r y w h e r e

sh e o r h e w i l l d i e o r b e k i l l e d a s a r e s u l t o f b e i n g s e n t b a c k . K a n t

d t a w s t h i s i m p l i c a t i o n h i m s e l f in a d r a f t fo r Perpetual Peace, m e n t io n -

in g t h a t people w h o a re fo rced b y c i rcum s tances ou t s ide the i r control

to a r r i v e on a no t he r state's te r r i t o r y s h o u l d b e al low ed to s tay a t l e a s t

u n t i l th e c i r c u m s t a n c e s a r e f a v o u r a b l e f o r t h e i r r e t u r n . H e gives th ee x a m p l e s o f s h i p w r e c k v i c t i m s w a s h e d a sh o r e a nd o f s a i l o r s o n a ship

s e e k ing r e f u g e fro m a s to rm in a f o re i g n h a r b o u r , t h u s in e f fec t s t a t ing

t h a t cosmopolitan law im p l ie s th e right to a safe haven (23: 173}. Kant

h e r e a n t i c i p a t e s m a n y of the r e f u g e e r ig h t s t ha t w e re e s t a b l i s he d in the

t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y .1'4

K a nt ' s v i e w t ha t s t a te s h a v e th e r ig h t to re j ec t v is i to rs fo r a ny

reason u n l e ss it causes their d e s t ru c t io n raises th e question o f w h e t h e r

t h i s does n o t m a k e c o s m o p o l i ta n l a w t o o res t r ic t ive . Hot e x a m p l e ,

w o u l d i t be p e r m i s s ib l e for a s t a t e to t u r n a w a y r e q u e s t s f o r p o l i t i c a l

a s y l u m o n t h e g r o u n d s that, i f r e t u r n e d , th e app l icant faces torture o r

i m p r i s o n m e n t b u t n o t a c e r ta in d e a t h? A n d a r e states f ree to re ject

f o r e i g ne r s o n r a c i s t g r o u n d s ? K a n t h i m s e l f d o e s n o t a d d re s s t he s e

i s s u e s , b u t t h e y a re c l e a r l y i s su e s t h a t m u s t b e a d d r e s s e d in a d e f e n c e

o f h is notion o f c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w . In d i s c u s s ing t h i s l a c una in K a n t ' s

a c c o u n t , i t is i m p o r t a n t to e m p h a s iz e t h a t h e w a s p r i m a r i l y c o n ce rn e d

w i t h l i m i t i n g th e r ight s o f c o l o n ia l i s t a g g re s s o r s . F o re m o s t o n h i s

m i n d w e r e E u r o p e a n s t a t e s b e n t o n t a k ing p o s se s sio n o f l a n d o v er s e a s

w i t h o u t a n y r e g a r d fo r the c l a i m s o f t h e n a t i v e p o p u l a t io n . In l im i t i n g

fo re igners ' claims to access, he i s a i m i n g to s u p p o r t th e sovereignty o f

i n d i g e n o u s peoples a ga i ns t u n w a n t e d E u r o p e a n encroachment.

K a n t c o u l d , h o w e v e r , e a s i l y h a ve a n t i c i p a t e d to d ay ' s q u e s t i o n s

r e g a r d i n g th e p r e c i s e scope o f r e f u g e e r i g h t s . T h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y

w a s f a m i l ia r e n o u g h w i t h th e p h e n o m e n o n o f refugees , an d t h e




t r e a t m e n t o f s o m e groups o f r e f u g e e s , fo r e x a m p l e Jews, o f t en d i d n o tm e e t K a n t ' s s t a n d a r d . B u t o n t h e b a s i s o f w h a t K a n t s a y s a b o u t

c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w , i t is p o s s i b l e to develop a n a n s w e r t o t h e q u e s t i o n s

posed above. Two points are central here. First, Kant's term

Untergang, rendered as 'destruction', could be interpreted more

b r o a d l y than r e f e r r i n g to death on ly . It could conce ivably also i n c lu d e

m e n t a l destruction or incapacitating p h y s ic a l harm, in which case the

range of cases to which it applies w o u l d be m u c h greater. Second,

K a n t ' s theory of cosmopolitan law has s o m e room for l i m i t s on the

range o f l e g i t i m a t e r e a s o n s f o r re j e c t io n . I t w o u l d se em t h a td i s c r i m i n a t o r y r u l e s t h a t keep g r o u p s o f f o r e ig n e r s o u t b y l a w j u s t

b e c a u s e t h e y h a v e a c e r t a i n sk i l l c o l o u r d i s r e g a r d t h e s e f o r e i g n e r s '

r i g h t t o p r e s e n t t h e m s e l v e s a n d t o tr y t o e s t a b l i s h contact. I f t h e y w i l l

b e r e j e c te d a p r i o r i , r e g a r d l e s s o f w h o t h e y a r e o r w h a t t h e y h a v e t o

o f f e r o r a s k , t h e i r r i g h t t o a t te m p t to e s t a b l i s h c o n t a c t i s e m p t y .

This s h o u l d n o t b e t a k e n t o i m p l y th a t s t a t e s a r e n o t a l l o w e d t o

m a k e a n y l a w s t h a t e x c l u d e c e r t a i n categories o f f o r e i g n e r s f r o m

e n t e r i n g . K a n t h i m s e l f s u p p o r t s t h e C h i n e s e a n d J a p a n e s e in t h e i r

a t t e m p t t o k e e p E u r o p e a n t r a d e r s a t a d i s t a n c e . W h a t K a n t w o u l d

need here is a d i s t in c t ion between legitimate and i l l e g i t i m a t e r e a s o n s

fo r keeping certain groups o u t . A r g u a b l y , s u c h a distinction could be

d r a w n in terms of whether or not the exclusionary law or policy

respects the rights of others, and whether its criteria are re la red to the

actions and proposals of the f o r e i g n e r rather t h a n being based on an

a r b i t r a r y , i r r e l e v a n t characteristic. For example, a law that d i s c r i m i n -

ates on the basis of skin colour w o u l d be i l l e g i ti m a t e , wh i le a law that

f o r b i d s persons f r o m e n t e r i n g th e c o u n t r y to se l l o p i u m w o u l d n o t .

W h i l e o p i u m salespersons s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d to r e q u e s t e n t r y , i t is

w i t h i n t h e r i g h t o f s t a t e s t o s e n d t h e m a w a y b e c a u s e o f t h e i r s p e c i f i c

p l a n s . T h e l i n e b e t w e e n l e g i t i m a t e a n d i l l e g i t i m a t e r e a s o n s f o r

r e j e c t i o n m a y b e q u i t e h a r d t o draw i n p r a c t i c e , a n d a s w i t h a n y l e g a l

p r i n c i p l e , t h e r e w i l l b e h a r d c a se s w h e n i t c o m e s t o a p p l y i n g i t. B u t

t h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t h er e i s t h a t K a n t is n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o m m i t te d t o

t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t a n y g r o u n d f o r r e j e c t io n w i l l d o .

Justification

K a n t g r o u n d s c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w in t h e 'original c o m m u n i t y o f t h e

land', that i s i n t h e idea that before a n y p a r t i c u l a r a c q u i s i t i o n o fproperty, the earth is in common possession. A f t e r such acquisition,

others no longer h ave a r igh t f u l c l a im to use or occupy what is mine,

KANTIAN RMEW VOLUME Z. 1998 77




i n t e rp r e t i n g the right to hospitality as the right to try to a c q u i re otherpeople's p r o p e r t y , regardless of national botders, T ie f t r u n k p rov ides

a j u s t i f i c a t i o n fo r o n l y part o f what is covered u n d e r c o s m o p o l i t a n

law. If a ll a t t e m p t s a t c o s m o p o l i t a n i n t e r a c t i o n w o u l d h a v e to be seen

a s a t t e m p t s t o s t a r t n e g o t i a t i o n s a b o u t p r o p e r t y t r a n s a c t i o n s , n o t

e ve n t h e c a se s m e n t i o n e d b y K a n t h i m s e l f , s u c h a s s h i p w re c k v i c t i m s

w a s h e d a s h o r e a n d s a i l o r s s e e k i n g a s a f e h a v e n f ro m a s t o rm , w o u l d

b e covered . Thus, w e n e e d a f u r t h e r a c c o u n t o f w h y s t r a n g e r s h a v e a

r i g h t no t t o b e t r e a t e d w i t h h o s t i l i t y u p o n t h e i r a r r i v a l o n f o r e i g n

t e r r i t o r y .K a n t co u l d h av e d e v e lo p e d s u c h a n a c c o u n t s t r a i g h t f r o m t h e

o r i g in a l , in n a t e h u m a n r i g h t to f r e e d o m , however .17

This is a r i g h t

t h a t i s n o t a c q u i r e d b u t b e l o n g s to e ve r y h u m a n b e in g b y b i r th a l o n e .

I t is the right to ' f reedom { independence f rom th e coercive choice o f

a n o t h e r ) , i n so f a r a s i t c a n coexist w i th th e f t eedom o f eve ry other in

a c c o r d a n c e w i t h a un ive rsa l l aw ' (MM 6: 237). It includes ' i n n a t e

equality, that is the i n d e p e n d e n c e f r o m being b o u n d b y o t h e r s t o

more than one can in t u r n b i nd them' (MM 6: 237). This innate r i g h t

to f r e e d o m a p p l i e s to what is ' i n t e rn a l l y m i n e o r yours', that is, ap e r s o n ' s m e n t a l a n d p hys i c a l facu l t i e s in so fa r a s these ca n b e

i n f l u e n c e d b y o t h e r s (M M 6: 238). Th e i n n a t e r ig h t to f r e e d o m a l s o

i n c l u d e s , a s K a n t m e n t i o n s e ls e w h e re in the Metaphysics of Morals ,

th e 'right t o b e th e r e w h e r e n a t u r e o r c h a n c e (w i t h o u t [ o n e ' s ] w i l l) h a s

p l a c e d ( o n e ) ' ( M M 6 : 262). I n t h e u n p u b l i s h e d d r a f t fo r the D o c t r i n e

o f R i g h t K a n t m o t i v a te s t h is b y s a y i n g t h a t b e i n g o n l a n d is n e c e s s a r y

fo r th e ve ry exi s tence o f h u m a n b e in g s, a n d t h u s , t h a t p e o p l e h a v e a

r i g h t to b e o n t h e l a n d o n w h i c h t h e y a re p l ac e d t h r o u g h n o cho ice o f

t h e i r o w n , s in c e d e n y i n g t h e m t h i s r i g h t w o u l d m e a n d e n y i n g t h e mthe i r ex i s tence a n d t h e i r f t e e d o m (23 : 318)."

Th e i n n a t e h u m a n right to f r e e d o m i s a l l one needs to b a c k u p t h e

p r inc ip l e o f h o s p i t a l it y . F o r th i s r i gh t impl i e s p rec ise ly the two aspec t s

c e n t r a l t o Kant's u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t he hosp i ta l i t y p r inc ip le : that

prospec t ive v is i to rs have n o r i g h t t o i n t r u d e into th e s p h e re o f f ree -

d o m o f others a g a i n s t their w i l l , a n d that ne i t he r states n o r

i n d i v i d u a l s h a v e th e r i g h t to refuse vis i tors when this would lead to

th e a n n i h i l a t i o n o f the i r f reedom ( the i r des t ru c t ion) .

F u r t h e r support fo r the c la im tha t Kan t ' s doc t r ine o f c o s m o p o l i ta nl a w i s b e s t g r o u n d e d o n h i s n o t i o n o f the i n n a t e r ig h t to f r e e d o m ca n

b e f o u n d i n t h e c o m m e n t s t h a t h e m a k e s i n t h e s e c t i o n i n w h i c h h e

i n t r o d u c e s this r i g h t . Here K a n t s a y s i t implies the t igh t ' t o do to

KANTIAN REVIEW. VOLUME 2 I99B 79



PAULINE KLEINGELD

o t h e r s a n y t h i n g t h a t d o cs not in i tsel f d i m i n i s h w h a t is t h e i t s , s o long

a s they d o n o t w a n t to accep t i t ' (MM 6: 238). A s a n ex ample , h e

m e n t i o n s c o m m u n i c a t i n g one's t h o u g h t s to others, I t i s up to t h e m

w h e t h e r to a c c e p t w h a t is be ing sa id , t he reby perhaps i n c u r r i n g f al se

bel iefs . B y e x t e n s i o n , on e ca n d e r i v e a r i g h t to p r e s e n t on ese l f to

o t h e r s a n d r e q u e s t e n t r y , i n t e r a c t i o n , e x c h a n g e , e tc. , w hich s t i l l l eaves

th e addres sees a t l i b e r t y to r e f u se th e r eques t . O n e does n o t d i m i n i sh

t h e i r f r e e d o m b y t r y i n g .

A s p e c i a l p r o b l e m is p o s e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t g r a n t i n g re fug ee s t a t u sto a p e r s o n s e e m s to en t i t l e h im o r he r t o d e p r i v e o t h e r s o f t h e i r

e x t e r n a l p r o p e r t y r i g h t s , a g a i n s t th e i r w i ll . T h e stranger's s t a y i n g o n

l a n d o w n e d b y others seems to ' d i m i n i s h w h a t is thei rs ' . A f te r all , to

o w n a n o b j e c t m e a n s th a t one i s w r o n g e d if one is d i s tu r b e d in the u se

of the o b j e c t b y s o m e o n e e l se , r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r o n e p h y s i c a ll y

h o l d s the objec t (c f . MM 6: 245-57). Therefore , the i n j u n c t i o n to let

th e s t r a n g e r u s e a piece o f land, even if i t is as s m a l l as the space

n e e d e d fo r a body, s e e m s a n i n f r i n g e m e n t u p o n th e p r o p e r t y r i g h t s o f

i ts o w n e r s . In t h i s w a y , a c o n f l i c t w o u l d s e e m to e m e r g e b e t w e e nc la im s f o u n d e d o n t h e i n n a t e r ig h t to f r e e d o m a n d c la im s f o u n d e d o n

p r o p e r t y r i g h t s , t h u s s h o w i n g K a n t 's d o c tr i n e o f c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w t o

b e i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h is t h e o r y o f p r i v a t e law.

O n e c o u l d o f c o u r s e t r y t o s o l v e t h is p r o b l e m b y p o i n t i n g ou t t h a t

fo re igne r s d o n o t acquire a n y p r o p e r r y w h e n t h e y a re ent i t l ed to the

t e m p o r a r y e n j o y m e n t o f other peop l e ' s property, say, o f a foreign

h a r b o u r in a storm, o r a s h o r e o n which t hey a re sh ipwrecked . Al so ,

K a n t d o e s n o t s a y t h a t t h e v i s i t o r s m u s t b e given a n y goods, s u c h a s

food , fo r f ree . W h i l e b o t h p o i n t s a r e t r u e , h o w e v e r, t h e y d o n o t f u l l y

address the p r o b l e m , b e ca u s e t h e y do not solve the d i f f i c u l t y that

fo re igne r s s t i l l i n t e r f e r e wi th th e r i g h t o f t he properry o w n e r to

d e t e r m i n e h o w a n d b y w h o m th e p r o p e r ty is used.

I w o u l d l i k e to a r g u e , h o w e v e r , t h a t th e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f c o s m o -

p o l i t a n l a w a n d t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f p r i v a t e la w c a n b e r e co n c il ed . I n h i s

d i s c u s s i o n o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l la w , K a n t m e n t i o n s a case that is in s o m e

i n t e r e s t i n g r e s p e c t s a n a l o g o u s to the case at hand. He a r g u e s t h a t a

g o v e r n m e n t h a s t h e r i g h t to i m p o s e t a x e s o n t h e p e o p l e in o r d e r to

p r o v i d e fo r the poor a n d f o r f o u n d l i n g h o m e s (M M 6: 326). H e

j u s t i f i e s th i s b y s a y i n g that th e s t a t e is f o u n d e d o n t h e genera l w i l l o fth e people (as a r a t i o n a l i d e a , n o t a n e m p i r i c a l r ea l i t y ) , a n d that th e

people u n i t e t h e m s e lv e s i n t o a c o m m o n w e a l th u n d e r the r u l e o f l aw i n

o r d e r to e n s u r e t h a t those m e m b e r s of society who are not ab l e to

KANTIAN REVIEW, VOLUM E 2. 1998




m a i n t a i n themselves wi l l be maintained with the help of the state.

Therefore, the state has a right to tax the wealthy (who themselves

b e n e f i t f r o m th e protection o f t h e state, too) o n behalf o f t h e susten-

ance o f their co-citizens.

In cosmopolitan law, individuals a n d s t a t e s , w h o stand i n a n

external r e l a t i o n s h i p o f mutual i n f lu e n c e , a re r e g a r d e d a s c i t i z e ns o f a

universal state o f hu manki nd (see above, p.74). This makes i t p o s s i b l e

to draw an analogy between the justification of the imposition of

taxes by the state and that of the legal requirement to let foreignersu se parts of one's territory in the case here at issue. Those who own

t e r r i t o r y on which foreigners arrive due to forces beyond their control

c a n then b e required under cosmopolitan l a w t o l e t f o r e i g n e r s u s e p a r t

o f their p r o p e r t y i f t h i s i s n e c e s s a r y fo r their s u r v i v a l . O b v i o u s l y , in

h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f taxation K a n t goes much f u r t h e r t h a n i n h i s d e f e n c e

of the right t o a s a f e h a v e n . H e does no t a sk fo r a w o r ld - w i d e taxation

system o r argue that there is a l e g a l requirement to give u p part o f

one's property for the benefit of strangers, but only implies that t h e y

should be able to use it temporarily, if this is necessary for theircontinued existence. But for present purposes what is important is

that Kant does envision at least one other situation in which property

o w n e r s a re l e g a l l y obliged to give u p some rights to their property in

order to provide f o r t h e sustenance o f someone whose existence

w o u l d b e endangered otherwise.

The Problem of Institutionalization

K a n t says virrually nothing about the institutionalization of

c o s m o p o l i t a n law. There are two questions here. The f irs t question is

what f o r m coercion could take. This is important because Kant sees

Recht (rights, r i g h t f u l law) a n d t h e u s e o f necessary coercion a s t w o

sides o f the same coin ( M M 6 : 231-2). Th e lack o f e n f o r c e m e n t

p o s s i b i l i t i e s would s ee m t o p u t t h e v e r y designation echt Welt-

hürgerrecht (cosmopolitan law) at peril. The second question

concerns what cosmopolitan citizenship consists in, particularly,

whether humans and states can self-legislate cosmopolitan law. It

seems that they would have to have a hand in framing cosmopolitan

law in some way, if Kant is to avoid paternalism. Both questions point

t o t h e problem that either cosmopolitan l a w i s n o t p u b l i c l a w i n a n y

l i t e r a l sense, o r Kant must b e sneaking in some kind o f world

K NTI N REVIEW. VOLUME 2 . 1 9 98 81



PAULINE KLEINGELD

r e p u b l i c a n i s m . G i v e n t h a t K a n t b a r e l y a d d r e s s e s t h e s e i s s u e s , to

a n s w e r t h e s e q u e s t i o n s involves g o i n g b e y o n d K a n t ' s o w n w r i t i n g s .

B u t I w i l l s h o w t h a t o n e c a n d e v e l o p a m o d i f ie d K a n t i a n a c c o u n t o n

t h e b a s i s o f h i s o w n p r i n c i p l e s . I b e g i n w i t h t h e p r o b l e m o f coe rc ion .

Coercion

As i t s t a n d s , K a n t ' s t h e o r y p r o v i d es n o w a y o f s o l v i n g th e p r o b l e m o f

e n f o r c e m e n t a nd coercion. H e re jec ts th e very poss ibi l i ty o f t r a n s -

n a t i o n a l e n f o r c e m e n t o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l law, w h i c h m a k e s i t i m p o s s i b l e

t o d r a w o n h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w i n o r d e r to so lve the

p r o b l e m of the e n f o r c e m e n t o f c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w . M o re o v e r , th e

s e c t i o n on the ' s p i r i t o f t r a d e ' , w h i c h li e c a l l s t h e ' g u a r a n t e e1 o f

c o s m o p o l i t a n law (PP 8: 365), provides no s o l u t i o n . Br ie f l y p u t , h is

a r g u m e n t t h e r e g o e s a s f o l l o w s . M o n e t a r y g r e e d w i l l e n c o u r a g e s t a t e s

to p r o m o t e peace, s ince t r a d e m a k e s m o n e y , m a k i n g m o n e y is in th e

m u t u a l i n t e r e s t o f a l l s t a t e s , a n d p e a c e i s m o r e h o s p i t a b l e to t r a d e

t h a n w a r. P r o m o t i n g p e a c e r e q u i r e s n e g o t i a t i o n s , w h i c h m e a n s in t e r -

n a t i o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n , w h i c h i s w h a t c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w i s a l l a b o u t (P P

8 : 3 6 8 ) ,

T h i s i s no r e a l s o l u t i o n , h o w e v e r , s i n c e t h e r e i s n o t h i n g in the p u r -

s u i t o f c o m m e r c i a l g a m a s s u c h t h a t i m p l i e s t h a t h o s p i t a l it y r i g h t s f o r

ail humans (n o t j u s t sa les represen ta t ives , b u t also philosophers,

t o u r i s t s , r e f u g e e s , a n d o t h e r s ) w i l l b e th e i n e v i t a b l e s p i n - o f f . T h e

i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n th e Uni ted States and t he People 's R e p u b l i c o fC h i n a p r o v i d e s a c u r r e n t e x a m p l e . C h i n a d o e s not le t a i l of i t s c i t iz e n s

t rave l a b r o a d f r ee l y , w h i c h m e a n s t h a t th e c o s m o p o l i t a n r i g h t s o f

m a n y a r e v i o l a t e d . B u t n e i t h e r o n t h e U S s i d e n o r o n t h e C h i n e s e s i d e

i s the spirit o f trade s u f f i c i e n t to c h a n g e t h i s s i t u a t i o n . N o r does i t

p r e v e n t C h i n a f ro m t r e a t i n g n o n - c o m m e r c i a l f or eig n v i s i t o r s h o s t i l e ly

(a s s o m e s a y h a p p e n e d d u r i n g t h e r ec en t U n i t e d N a t i o n s c o n f e r e n c e

o n th e s t a t u s o f w o m e n ) . N o r d i d t h e sp i r i t o f trade protect North

K o r e a n r e f u g e e s f r o m b e i n g s e n t b a c k b y C h i n a t o f a c e a c e r t a ind e a t h . M u t u a l c o m m e r c i a l in te res t s d o seem to provide a n in cen t i ve to

t h e U S a n d C h i n a t o p rese rve peace a n d c o m m e r c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . B u t

i t d o e s n o r d o e n o u g h to g u a r a n t e e h o s p i t a l i t y r ig h ts f o r e v e r y o n e .

T h u s , o th e r m e c h a n is m s t h a n t r a d e a r e needed to g u a r a n t e e c o s m o -

p o l i t a n r i g h t s u n i v e r s a l l y .




m u s t r e j e c t K a n t ' s c l a i m t h a t t r a n s n a t i o n a l e n f o r c e m e n t i s n e i t h e r

d e s i r a b l e n o r poss ib le . B u t th i s d a i m o f K an t ' s h a s a p r o b l e m a t i c

s t a t u s in l i g h t o f h i s g e n e r a l t h e o r y t h a t r igh t s a n d coe rc ion b e lo ng

t o g e t h e r , a n d t h u s , r e j e c t i n g i t a l l o w s f o r a m o r e c o n s is t e n t K a n t i a n

p o s i t i o n . S e v e r a l a u t h o r s h a v e r e c e n t l y s h o w n t h a t K a n t ' s p o s i t i o n o n

t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l la w is i n c o n s i s t e n t a n d u n -

n e c e s s a r y , a n d t h a t ilis o w n p r i n c i p l e s s h o u l d h a ve l e d h im t o a d v o c a t e

th e f o r m a t i o n o f a t r a n s n a t i o n a l b o d y o f s t a t e s w i th l i m i t ed co e rc i v e

powers." M o r e o v e r , K a n t ' s q u i t e u n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c c l ai m t h a t w e

s h o u l d op t f o r a l o o s e c o n f e d e r a t i o n o f s ta tes b e c a u s e s t a t e s w i l l n e v e rwant to j o i n a t r a n s n a t i o n a l b o d y w i t h c o er ci ve p o w e r s (PP 8: 357) h a s

to a l a r g e e x t e n t b e e n f a l s i f i e d b y t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y d e v e lo p m e n t s.

T o s a y t h a t K a n t ' s t h e o r y i s c o m p a t i b l e w i t h e n f o r c e m e n t o f

c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w i s n o t ye t t o s p e c i f y w h a t f o r m a t r a n s n a t i o n a l b o d y

s h o u l d t a k e t h a t g u a r a n t e e s c o s m o p o l i ta n r i g h t s , a n d t h i s , t h e n , i s t he

n e x t q u e s t i o n . I d o n o t a nswe r t h i s q u e s t i o n i n f u l l , b u t I p o i n t to o n e

poss ib le a n s w e r , suggested b y t w e n t i e th - c e n t u r y history.

T r a d i t i o n a l l y , i n d i v i d u a l s a p p e a r a s t h e s u b j e c t s o f r igh t s in

i n t e r n a t i o n a l l aw o n ly i n so f a r a s t hey a re c i t i z ens o f states, th at i s , inv i r t u e o f the i r na t i o na l i t y . In t he case o f d i s p u t e s , i n d i v i d u a l s m u s t

a p p e a l fo r p r o t e c t i o n to a n a t i o n a l l ega l o r d e r (e i the r t he i r o w n o r a

fo re i g n o n e ) , w i t h o u t h a v i n g access to t r a n s n a t i o n a l le v e ls o f a p p e a l s .

M o r e o v e r , s t a t e s w e r e g r a n t e d so v ere i g n ty and - as a l so l a i d d o w n in

th e C h a r t e r of the U n i te d N a t i o n s - f r e e d o m f r om i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h

t h e i r i n t e r n a l a f f a i r s . T h i s g av e s t a t e sovereigns a p re t e x t , i f no t

a u t h o r i z a t i o n , t o d e a l w i t h t h e i r s u b j e c t s a s t h e y s a w f i t . B u t in t h i s

c e n t u r y , in p a r t in reac t i o n t o v a s t a b u s e s o f th i s p r i nc i p l e , t h e s t a tu s

o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n intern tion l l a w h a s b een s t r e n g t h e n e d . A s A l f r ed

Verd ro ss a n d B r u n o S i m m a p u t it :

The newest developments in in ternational law have broken up the ab s o l u t e

s u b j e c t i o n of peop l e to the state . Not only does [he content of an ever grow-

in g n u m b e r o f treaties in in te rna t iona l la w serve t he interests o f i n d i v i d u a l

h u m a n s o r cer ta in g r o u p s , b u t i n d i v i d u a l s a re also being e l e v a t e d

im m ed ia t e l y to bearers of rights u n d e r i n t e r n a t i o n a l law, and t l i e y are put in

a pos i t ion to assert these r igh ts at the l e v e l of internat iona l law thetnselves.10

These n e w r i g h t s a r e n o t t i ed t o a p a r t i c u l a r n a t i o n a l i t y o n t h e p a r t o f

th e i n d i v i d u a l . Th e i mp ro v ed l eg a l s t a t u s o f re fug ees ca n serve as an

e x a m p l e . C e n t r a l to t he t r ea t i e s r e su l t i ng f ro m th e 1951 G ene va

KANTIAN REVIEW; VOLUME 2. 19?s 83



PAULINE KLEINGELD

c o n v e n t i o n2 1

i s the p r o h i b i t i o n a g a i n s t r e f u s i n g o r deporting re fugees

i f t h a t e n d a n g e r s t h e m fo r r e a s o n s o f the i r r e lig ion , r a ce , p o l i t i c a l

v i e w s , o r m e m b e r s h i p i n a certain social g roup . I t does n o t a p p l y to

e n d a n g e r m e m i n t h e f o r m o f h u n g e r a n d pove r t y o r d i s e a s e , n o r does

it e x t e n d to a pos i t ive r i g h t to r e c e i v e a s y l u m ; o n e c a n r e q u e s t a s y lu m ,

b u t th e decision is s t i l l left to the sovere ign s ta tes . Never the le ss ,

p e r s o n s e n d a n g e r e d f o r a n y o f t h e r e a s o n s f irsr m e n t i o n e d a re legally

protected regardless o f t h e ir n a t i o n a l i t y .i n d i v i d u a l s n o t only have new r igh ts , bu t can a l so b e he ld

re spons ib le fo r c r i m e s u n d e r in t e r n a t i o n a l l aw , e v e n w h e n t h e i r a c t i o n s

a re legal w i t h i n t h e i r o w n state a n d the i r state h a s n o t s igned treaties

e x c l u d i n g su c h b e h a v i o u r . E x a m p l e s a r e t h e delicta iuns gentium, s u c h

a s s lave t r a d e , g e n o c i d e , t e r r o r i s m , m a n y of wh ich ha ve be e n the

s u b j e c t o f t rea t ies s ince th e 1970s.12 I n m a n y cases, i n d i v i d u a l st a te s a re

a u t h o r i z e d b y i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w to t ry p e r s o n s w h o a r e a c c u s e d o f s u c h

cr ime s . In o t h e r cases, i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r i b u n a l s p ro v id e some m e a ns o f

i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . S o fa r , such t r ibu na l s ha ve be en in s t i t u t e d ad hoc, butp r o p o s a l s fo r a p e r m a n e n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r im i n a l c o u r t a re be ing

discussed. A l t h o u g h effect iveness a n d cons i s t e ncy of i t s e n fo rce me n t

l ea v e m u c h t o b e de s ir e d, i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o r e a l i ze t h a t i n s u c h cases

i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w cu t s through th e shield o f s ta te sove re ign ty , creating

a new level o f l e ga l r e spon s ib i l i ty fo r i n d i v i d u a l s .

This is a s i g n i f i c a n t s h i f t in the p a r a d i g m o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l la w . F r o m

b e i n g li m i t e d to r e g u l a t in g th e re l a t ions be twe e n C hr i s t i a n sovereigns,

i ts scope w a s b r o a d e n e d u n t i l i t inc lud e d a ll states, a n d t h e n f u r t h e r to

i n c lu d e i n t e r n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t io n s s u c h a s t h e R e d Cross. Th e f a c tt h a t n o w i n d i v i d u a l h u m a n b ein g s a r e de s igna te d a s s u b j e c t s o f

i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w i s a n o t h e r b i g s t e p . In e f f e c t , i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w n o w

i n c l u d e s t h e c a t e g o r y o f r i g h t s t h a t K a n t s u b s u m e d u n d e r th e t i t l e o f

cosmopolitan l a w .

I n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w h a s i n some respects broadened th e scope o f

i n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s b e y o n d th e ' l i m i t s ' K a n t s e t f o r c o s m o p o l it a n l a w i n

th e th i rd d e f i n i t i v e ar t ic le in Perpetual Peace. B u t m a n y o f these newer

d e v e l o p m e n t s a r e c o m p a t i b l e with h is v i e w s . F o r e x a m p l e , a s I

ind ica t e d e a r l i e r , o n e c a n der ive a strong no t ion o f r e f u g e e r i g h t s f r o mK a n t ' s w r i t i n g s . M o r e o v e r , th e ' l i m i t s ' h e s e t w e r e m e a n t to l i m i t th e

r i g h t s o f c o l o n i a l p o w e r s r a t h e r th a n th e f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t o f

i n d i v i d u a l r igh t s .

E n f o r c e m e n t i s c u r r e n t l y l i m i t e d a n d i n c o n s i s t e n t , b u t i t e x is t s . It is

a f f e c t e d b y th e u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m o n e y a n d p o we r b e t we e n

locvicw VOIIIMF I998



PAULINE KLEINGELD

at th e n a t i o n a l level, c a n f o rm t h e c u l t u r a l seedbed fo r t r a n s n a t i o n a l

p o l it ic a l i n i t i a t i v e s s u p p o r t i n g c o s m o p o l i ta n rights,

A g a i n , t h e r e is no g u a r a n t e e . While s o m e b a r r i e r s g e t b ro k e n d o w n ,

others become m o r e p r o m i n e n t. The existing ec on omic and po l i t i c a l

in eq u a l i t i e s be tween r i c h a n d poor, both w i t h i n states a n d be tween

s t a t e s , s t i l l f o r m a m a s s i v e o b s t a c l e to the r e a l i z a t i o n o f e q u a l c o sm o -

p o l i t a n c i t i z ensh i p o f a l l . For e x a m p l e , th e i n t e r n e t is w o n d e r f u l f o r

a l l o w i n g people fa r a p a r t t o g e t i n touc h a n d e x c h a n g e i n f o r m a t i o n

a n d ideas. B u t i f th e i n f r a s t r u c t u r e in one's c o u n t r y does n o t supporti t , o n e c a n n o t af ford a c om pu te r , i s i l l it e r a t e , o r does n o t sp eak t h e

d o m i n a n t l a n g u a g e , o n e i s n o w f u r t h e r b e h i n d t h a n b e f o r e .

This e x a m p l e s h o u l d also serve to w a r n a g a i n s t e a s y e q u a t i o n s o f

m a r k e t g l o b a l i z a t i o n w i t h a g l o b a l i n c r e a s e i n c o s m o p o l i ta n c i t izen -

ship. T h e g l o b a l spread o f ca p i t a l i s m and i t s products, say , a

U S - b a s e d h a m b u r g e r c h a i n , does n o t pe r s e lead to a n increased

r e a l i za t i on o f c o s m o p o l i t a n r i g h t s o f i n d i v i d u a l human beings."

W h a t is n e c e s s a r y for the r e a l i z a t i o n o f c o s m o p o l i t a n r i g h t s a re no t so

m u c h economic, b u t p o l i ti c a l in i t ia t ives a n d gua ran t ee s .

l i u t o n e does n o t n eed a w o r l d s ta te , in the se nse of a s inglep o l i t i c a l s i a t e a b s o r b i n g a l l c u r r e n t l y e x i s t i ng s t a t e s , in o rde r t o

conce ive of the possibility of the rea l iza t ion o f cosmopolitan l a w t o

some degree. Les s r ad ic a l f o r m s o f t r a n s n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ca n also

g i v e m e a n i n g to r e f u g e e r igh ts . Thus, w e should no t b e m o r e

pes s imis t i c than the c u r r e n t state of the wor ld forces us to be. Given

the lega l changes made in t h i s c e n t u r y - o f t en prompted, it m u s t be

s a i d , b y h o r r e n d o u s c r im e s — w e c a n s t d l say , w i t h K a n t , t h a t 'the idea

of a c o s m o p o l i t a n law i s no t f a n t a s t i c and o v e r s t r a i n e d ' {PP 8: 360),

because it is possible to give a K a n t i a n a c c o u n t of the i n s t i t u t i o n a l -

i za t io r i o f cosmopolitan law, a t leas t to a degree.

In this p a p e r I h a v e a r g u e d t h a t K a n t ' s category o f cosmopolitan la w

is n e i t h e r s u p e r f l u o u s n o r m e t a p h o r i c a l a n d t h a t i t is an a p p r o p r i a t e

c a t e g o r y fo r c o n c e p t u a l i z in g th e changes t h a t h a v e ta k e n p l a c e w i t h i n

i n t e r n a t i o n a l la w r e g a r d i n g th e status o f persons. Thus, th e i m p o r t -

a n c e o f c o s m o p o l i t a n la w , b o t h w i t h in K a n t 's p o l i t i c a l t h e o r y a n d a s a

t h e m e in t he c u r r e n t d i s cu s s ion about c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m> s h o u l d n o

l o n g e r b e u n d e r e s ti m a t e d .K a n t is a c o s m o p o l i ta n o f a m o d e r a t e c as t. H is v iew i s c on s ide rab l y

less r a d i c a l t h a n p r o p o sa ls to o v e r t h r o w th e n a t i o n - s t a t e s y s t em , a n d

KANTIAN REVIEW VOLUME 1998




his concept of cosmopolitan law, when taken in isolation from the rest

of his political philosophy, is compatible with a range of views

regarding what political bodies the world should contain. It is

compatible with different views on this issue, as long as they provide

for a l e v e l of public law at which humans have certain basic human

rights as 'citizens of thé world', rather than as members of any

particular lower-level political body.

Yet, even this moderate cosmopolitanism is quite radical. How to

institutionalize cosmopolitan rights f u l l y in a world in which eco-

nomic, political, and other inequalities make it impossible to

guarantee their protection is a difficult question. I do not claim to

have answered this question here, but I have shown that it is at least

not impossible to conceive of an institutionalization to some degree.27

Notes

Page references are to K.ant Gesammelte Schriften, edited u n d e r t h e auspicesof the Königliche Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin: Walter de

GruyterT 190Z- }. All translations are my own. Abbreviations used: MM =

Metaphysics of Morals; PF = Perpe tua l Peace; TP = 'On the common saying:

"This may be true in theory, but it docs not apply in practice" .

' See, for example, Jurg.cn Habermas, 'Kaut's idea of p e r p e t u a l peace, w i t h

t h e b e n e f i t o f tw o hundred y e a r s ' hindsight', in James B o h m a n and

Matthias L u t z - B a c h m a n n (eds.), Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant's

Cosmopolitan Ideal (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997), pp.113-53;

Howard W i l l i a m s , International Relations and the Limits of Political

Theory (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1996), esp. ch.9; David Held,

Democracy and the Global Order. From the Modern State to

Cosmopolitan Governance (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995).

Martha C. Nussbaum has drawn on Kant's moral theory for a m o r a l

version of cosmopolitanism. See 'Patriotism and cosmopolitanism', in

Joshua Cohen (éd.), Por Love of Country: Debating the Limits of

Patriotism (Boston: Beacon Press, 1996), pp.3-17, and see her a r t i c l e ,

'Kant a n d cosmopolitanism', i n B o h m a n a n d Lutz-Bachmann (ed s . ) ,

Perpetual Peace, pp.25-57. In t h i s paper, 1 discuss n o t K a n t ' s moral b u t h i s

political cosmopolitanism. For a version of moral cosmopolitanism (in

the Kantian tradition} with political implications, sec Thomas W , Pogge,

'Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty', Ethics, 103 (1992), 48-75.2 In his i n s i g h t f u l book on democracy and globalization, David Held

mentions the change in the status o f individuals in international law, but



PAULINE KLEINGELD

h e does s o m e r e l y in o r d e r to s h o w [ h a t th e sovere ignty o f s t a t e s is being

contested. H e discusses K a n t ' s n o t i o n o f cosmopolitan la w br ief ly b u t n o t

i t s r a m i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s a s s u c h . I n s t e a d , f o r H e l d ,

the 'cosmopolitan c o m m u n i t y ' is 'a c o m m u n i t y of al d emo cra t i c

c o m m u n i t i e s ' (Democracy and the Global Ort fer , p.232). In c o n t r a s t to

m a n y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f h u m a n r i g h t s a s m o r a l r ig h t s, H a b e r m a s

e m p h a s i t e s t h a t t h e y a r c i n h e r e n t l y l e g a l in n a t u r e , a n d o r i e n t a t e d to

b eco m ing l eg a l r ig h t s i f t hey hav e no t b eco m e such a l read y . Thu s , he

s h a r e s K a n t ' s i n d i v i d u a l i st c o m m i t m e n t , a n d h e e x p l i c a t e s t h i s p o s i t i o n inpart wi t h re fe rence to K a n t . B u t H a b e r m a s docs n o t co ns id e r th e c u r r e n t

s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s u n d e r i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w a n d o n l y d i s c u s s e s K a n t ' s

account o f a 'cosmopolitan s i t u a t i o n ' in t h e ea r l y sense, m e n t i o n e d i n n ,4

b e l o w ( H a b e r m a s , ' K a n t ' s i d e a o f p e r p e t u a l peace').

From Francesco d e V i t o r i a (1492/3—1546) o n , f r e e c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d

t r a d e w e r e m e n t i o n e d in the c o n t e x t o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l law, i.e. a s r i g h t of

stales a n d t h e i r c i t i z e n s a g a i n s t other states. K a n t .seems to be th e f i rs t to

i n t r o d u c e i t a s a s e p a r a t e , t h i r d c a t e g o r y o f p u b l i c law.

In t h i s essay, 1 f o c u s o n K a n t ' s position in Perpetual Peace and the

Metaphysics of Morals. In e a r l i e r texts, K a n t d e f e n d s a l e a g u e o f s t a t e s

w i t h coercive powers. In 'Idea for a u n i v e r s a l h i s t o r y f r o m a c o s m o p o l i ta n

p o i n t o f v i e w ' , K a n t s p e a k s o f s u c h a l e a g u e a s a ' g r e a t p o l i t i c a l body' in

w h i c h e v e r y m e m b e r state rece ives i t s securi ty and r ights f r o m a ' u n i t e d

p o w e r a n d f r o m d e c i s i o n s in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the laws of a u n i te d w i l l' ( 8 :

24, 28; cf , also TP 8: 310-11), Al t ho ug h Kant ca l l s t h i s a 'cosmopolitan'

s t a t e o f a f f a i r s , only states, n o t i n d i v i d u a l s , a r e t h e ' c i t i z e n s ' in s u c h a

p o l i t i c a l system.s R e i n h a r d B r a n d t s h ow s t h a t th e t h i r d de f in i t i ve a r t i c l e c a n b e r e g a r d e d a s

th e s y s t e m a t i c c o m p l e t i o n o f t he f i r s t a n d second. S e e R e i n h a rd B r a n d t ,

'Vo m W e l t b u r g e r r e c h t ' , m O t f r i e d H ö f f e (éd.), Intntanuel Kant; Zutti

ewigett f rieden (B e r l in : A k a d e m i e Verlag , 1995), pp.133^8.fi Georg C a v a l l a r , Pax Kan t ian**: Systematisch-historische otitersuchung

des Entwitrfs ' Zm>i eivigen Frieden' (1795) vo n Imtnanuel Kant (Vienna :

B o h l a u , 1 9 9 2 ) , p p . 2 3 5 f f .7 W i l h e l m T r a u g o t t K rug , , ' A p h o r i s m e n lur Phi l o so p hie d e s Rechts', in

A n i t a D i e t z e a n d Wal ter D i e t z e (eds.)T E w i g e r Friede? Dokumente einer

fientschen Diskussion um 1800 (Le ip z ig : K iep cn heu e r , 1989), pp.362-3.8

T h e t e r m universal s t a t e o f h u m a n k i n d ' s h o u l d n o t b e t a k e n to i m p l y

t h a t K a n t a d v o c a t e s t h e e s t a b l is h m e n t o f a w o r ld state t h a t w o u l d absorb

e x i s t i n g s ta res . It refers t o t h e legal s y s t e m w h i c h u n i t e s a l l h u m a n s u n d er

common, c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w ( c f . M M 6 :Th e d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n Staat (PP) a nd Volk ( M M ) i n o t a s g rea t as i t m ay

seem t o b e . K a n t e x p l a i n s , i n 553 o f th e Metaphysics o f Morals , that th e

t e r m Volk c a n b e used ' in the l eg a l sense' a s natio. I t t h e n refers to a



KANTS COSMOPOLITAN L AW

p e o p l e b o r n w i t h i n th e s a m e r e p u b l i c a n state, w h o , a s c i t i z en s , f o r m

s o m e t h i n g l ike a f ami ly (MM 6: 343) .

On a t e r m i n o l o g i c a l no t e , K a n t m i g h t have w i s h ed to d r a w a d i s t i n c t io n

b e t w e e n a c t i v e a n d p a s s i v e w o r l d c i t i zens a n a l o g o u s to t h e d i s t in c t i o n in

M M §46. C h i l d re n , w h o d o n o t y e t h a v e th e r e q u i s i t e c o g n i t i v e c a p a c i t ie s

t o b e ac t ive c i t iz en s , w o u l d t h e n b e p a s s i v e w o r ld c i t i zens u n t i l t h e y reach

m a t u r i t y a n d a d v a n c e to a c t i v e w o r l d c i t i z e n s h i p . I n M M a n d T P K a n t

i n f a m o u s l y a nd inc o ns i s t e n t l y ai so excludes w o m e n a n d 'dependent'

workers f rom ac t ive c i t i zensh ip . Even i f Kant ex tended th is exclus ion to

t h e c o s m o p o l i t a n level , t h i s w o u l d no t e n t a il that ac t ive an d passive wor ld

citizens would be treated d i f f e r en t l y at the borde r . A l though 'pass ive

world c i t izens1 would b e e x c l u d e d f rom vo t i n g , bo th c la sses o f w o r l d

c i ti z e n s w o u l d b e e q u a l l y p r o t e c t e d b y t h e law. T h e r e f o r e , I u se g e n d e r -

i n c l u s i v e l a n g u a g e in the e x a m p l e s in m y d i s cu s s io n o f t h e c o n t e n t a n d

j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f c o s m o p o l i t a n l a w . S ee also m y a r t ic le , 'The p r o b l e m a t i c

s t a t u s o f g e n d e r - n e u t r a l l a n g u a g e in the h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y : t h e case o f

K a n t ' , Philosophical Forum, 25 (1993), 134-50.

In h e r t r a n s l a t i o n o f t r ie Metaphysics o f Morals , M a r y G r e g o r t r a n s l a t e s

Verkehr a s 'commerce', w h i c h is c o r r e c t b u t a m b i g u o u s , s ince it c o u l dalso b e r e a d n a r r o w l y a s r e f e r r i n g to b u s i n e s s o n l y .

K a n t ' s position i s he re d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed to Vitoria's, w h o a r g u e d

t h a t the S p a n i s h war a g a i n s t the A m e r ic a n I n d i a n s was j u s t i fi ed , b e ca u s e

they should not have denied the S p a n i s h the r i g h t to enter t h e i r te r r i to ry .

S ee Francisco de Vitoria, De Indis, Q.3, de tit . leg., art.l, in Francisco de

V i t o r i a , Political W r i t i n g s , ed , A n t h o n y Pagden an d J e r e m y L a w r a n c e

( C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r id g e U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1991), p.278.

See also Howan

B l a c k w e l l , 1983) ,p .Z60.

O n r e f u g e e r i g h t s , see G u y S . G o o d w i n - G i l l , T he Refugee in InternationalLaw, 2 n d e d n . ( O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n , 1996).

J o h a n n H e i n r i c h T i e f t r u n k , Philosophische U ntersuchungen über da s

Prit'at- und das offentliche Recht zur Erlauterung und Beurthetlung der

tnetaphysîschen Anfangs%ründe der Rechtslehre vont Herrn Prof. l u i m .

Kant (Ha l le : Rengcrsche B u c h h a n d l u n g , 1798), vol.2, pp.576-7.

Ibid,, pp.575-7.

I h e r e d e v e l o p a s u g g e s ti o n m a d e b y J u r g e n H a b e r m a s , in ' Ka n t ' s i d e a o f

p e r p e t u a l p e a c e ' , pp. 128-9.

See, o n K a n t 's d o c t r i n e o f t h e i n n a t e r i g h t to f r e e d o m , L e s l i e A r t h u r

M u l h o l i a n d , Kant's System o f R ig / j J s {New Y o r k : C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y

P r es s , 1990), p p . 199-231. O n th e r i g h t t o be on l a n d a s i n n a t e r i g h t , see ,

pp. 218-20.

M a t t h i a s L u t z - B a c h m a n n , ' K a n t ' s i d e a o f p e a c e a n d t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l

c o n c e p t i o n o f a w o r l d r e p u b l i c ' , i n Perpetual Peace, pp.59-77; O t f r i ed

W i l l i a m s , K a nt s Political Philosophy ( O x f o r d :

KANTIAN REVIEW. VOLUME l I99B



PAULINE KLEINGELD

H o f F e , ' K a n t a is Theoretiker d er in t e r n a t i o n a l en Rechtsgeme inschaf t' , in

Gerhard Schönrich and Y as u s h i K a t o (eds.), Kant in de r Diskussion der

Moderne ( F r a n k f u r t : S u h r k a m p , 1996], pp.489-505; Sharon B y r d , The

s ta te as a "moral person'", in Hoke Robinson (ed.)t Proceedings of the

Eighth International Kant Congress, Memphis 1995 {Mi lwaukee :

M a r q u e t t e U n ive r s i t y Press, 1995), pp.171-89.

A lf red Verdross a nd B r u n o S i n i m a , Universelles Völkerrecht: Theorie und

Praxis, 3 rd edn . (Ber l in : D u n c k e r Sc H u m b l o t , 1984), p.38. Translation

mine. S ee also Malcolm N . Shaw, International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge Univers i ty Press , 1991), pp.178-81.

28 J u l y 1951. United Hâtions Treaty Series, vol.189, pp.lSOff. This w as

not the f i rs t t r ea t y o n t h e s ta t u s o f refugees, bu t the re su l t of a develop-

m en t t h a t s t a r t e d in the ear ly decades o f t h i s c en t u r y . See V er d r o s s a nd

S i m m a , Universelles Völkerrecht, pp.839-40.

s Völkerrech

This does no t m a k e th e ca t egory obsolete, since t h a r w as developed in

teems of the b ea r e r s of r ights .

C f. ' What is e n l i g h t e n m e n t ? ' and TP p a c t 2,

C f. also J a m e s B o h i n a n , 'The pu bl ic spheres of the world citiz-en', inProceedings of the Eighth international Kant C o n gr e s s , pp . 1065-80.

In f ac t , a s B e n j a m i n B a r b e r p o i n t s o u t , i t may very w e l l lead to vehemen t

reactions in the f o r m of ' fact i t ious pat riot ism1 an d d an ge r o u s an t i -

un iver sa l i sm . S ee B e n j a m i n R . Barber , Jihad us. McWorSd ( N ew Y o r k :

Times Books, 1995). S ee also th e discuss ion of the ro le Ka nt a t t ribu tes to

22 Verdross and S im m a, Universelles cht, pp.260-7.

the ' spir i t o f t r ad e ' .

I wou ld l ike t o t h an k J o e l A n d e r s o n , C i a c a n C r o n in , L a rr y M ay , Thomas

M c C a r t h y , Thomas Pogge, Car l Wellman, an d t w o a n o n y m o u s referees

fo r he lp fu l c o m m e n t s . E a r l ie r ver s i ons o f th is essay w e r e p r e s e n t e d a t the

1996 conference on the 'Metaphysics or Morals1 at S m i t h College,

o r g a n i z e d b y S h a r o n B y r d, Ja n J o e r d cn , and Joachim H r u s c h k a , an d a t

th e 1997 meeting of the Cent ra l Div is ion of the APA. I wou ld l ike to

t h an k t h e p a r t i c ip an t s i n both meet ings for many h e l p f u l c o m m en t s an d

suggestions.

kleingeld, pauline (1998). kant´s cosmopolitan law

Documents