Citation

Kelsen H. Am. J. Sociol. 1941; 46(4): 571-581.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1941, University of Chicago Press)

DOI

10.1086/218699

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The lessons which one can draw from the breakdown of the League of Nations for a future organization for international peace are as follows: (a) that it was not possible to insure peace within the international community and simultaneously to guarantee against external aggression, attempting simultaneously the disarmament of the member states, without creating an international armed force;(b) that it was a mistake, therefore, to place in the center of an international organization an executive body such as the League Council without a judicial body such as the permanent World Court at The Hague; (c) and it was a further mistake not to have established the compulsory adjudication of disputes among members. In order to lay the psychological foundation for a future peace organization it is necessary to eliminate the prejudices which stand in the way of the establishment of a compulsory adjudication of international disputes. It is equally indispensable to avoid the error of believing that it is impossible to submit all disputes between states to an international tribunal, as long as there is no legislative body to adapt the inadequate system of international law as it exists today to existing political relationships. The discussion concludes with an analysis of the problem of whether, in addition to an international court with compulsory adjudicative powers, an administrative body, the main function of which would be the execution of the decisions of the court, would be expedient.