Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T09:23:06.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An alternative mode of international order: The international administrative union in the nineteenth century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2014

DOUGLAS HOWLAND
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A novel form of international order was developed in the nineteenth century by international administrative unions such as the International Telegraph Union and the Universal Postal Union. This administrative internationalism posed a striking alternative to the international society of great powers, sovereignty, and forms of imperial domination, for the members of administrative unions included not only sovereign states but also semi-sovereigns, vassals, and colonies. Members were equal and bound identically to the union treaty and its international administrative law. This article examines the structure of unions and their politics of membership in the nineteenth century, and engages theories of global governance to argue that early administrative unions present a mode of international order different from theories of both global networks and the international system of neorealism.

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 161 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Buzan, Barry and Lawson, George, ‘The Global Transformation: The Nineteenth Century and the Making of Modern International Relations’, International Studies Quarterly, 57:3 (2013), pp. 620–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar (quote on p. 620).

2 Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics, reprinted in Neorealism and its Critics, ed. Keohane, Robert O. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986 [orig. pub. 1979]), pp. 87–92, 117Google Scholar.

3 Prior to the development of international unions in the nineteenth century, there were significant numbers of private international organisations, today labelled ‘international non-governmental organizations’. Best known of these are the anti-slavery societies and peace organisations of the early nineteenth century, but they were arguably predated by religious and political organisations in the eighteenth century. See Reinalda, Bob, Routledge History of International Organizations: From 1815 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 2009), pp. 37–54Google Scholar; Archer, Clive, International Organizations (3rd edn, London: Routledge, 2001), pp. 4f, 12fGoogle Scholar; and Charnovitz, Steve, ‘Two Centuries of Participation: NGOs and International Governance’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 18:2 (1997), pp. 183–286, esp. 189–208Google Scholar.

4 Triepel, Heinrich, Völkerrecht und Landesrecht (Leipzig: Hirschfeld, 1899), pp. 49–74Google Scholar. See also Kasansky, M. P., ‘L'Union télégraphique internationale’, Journal télégraphique, 21:8 (8 August 1897), p. 180Google Scholar; Kunz, Otto, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen (Stuttgart: F. Enke, 1924), pp. 40–2, 125f.Google Scholar; Rapisardi-Mirabelli, Andréa, ‘Théorie générale des unions internationales’, Recueil des Cours, 7 (1925, part II), pp. 347–52Google Scholar; von Stein, Lorenz, ‘Einige Bemerkungen über das internationale Verwaltungsrecht’, [Schmollers] Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtschaft im Deutschen Reich, 6:2 (1882), pp. 420–30Google Scholar; and Vec, Miloš, Recht und Normierung in der industriellen Revolution (Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann, 2006), pp. 112–23Google Scholar.

5 Boisson, Henri, La Société des Nations et les Bureaux Internationaux des Unions Universelles Postale et Télégraphique (Paris: Pedone, 1932), pp. 4f, 16–20Google Scholar; Bühler, Hans, Der Weltpostverein: Eine völkerrechtsgeschichtliche und wirtschaftspolitische Untersuchung (Berlin: Ferd. Dümmlers, 1930), pp. 54–65, 158fGoogle Scholar; and Ranaivoson, Henri, L'union postale universelle (UPU) et la constitution d'un territoire postal unique (Berne: n.p., 1988), pp. 58–60Google Scholar.

6 von Mohl, Robert, Polizeiwissenschaft (1832–44), as cited in Stolleis, Michael, Public Law in Germany, 1800–1914 (New York: Berghahn, 2001), p. 230Google Scholar. See also Heuschling, Luc, État de droit, Rechtsstaat, Rule of Law (Paris: Dalloz, 2002), pp. 6, 36–50, 69fGoogle Scholar; and Lindenfeld, David F., The Practical Imagination: The German Sciences of State in the Nineteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), pp. 67–89, 115–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Lorenz von Stein, Verwaltungslehre (1866) as cited in Stolleis, Public Law in Germany, 1800–1914, p. 232. See also Koselleck, Reinhart, Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, trans. Tribe, Keith (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), pp. 65–9Google Scholar.

8 Lindenfeld, The Practical Imagination, pp. 126–8, 200f; Kästner, Karl-Hermann, ‘From the Social Question to the Social State’, Economy and Society, 10:1 (1981), pp. 7–26Google Scholar; Pankoke, Eckart, ‘Soziale Politik als Problem öffentlicher Verwaltung: Zu Lorenz von Steins gesellschaftswissenschaftlicher Programmierung des “arbeitenden Staates”’, in Schnur, Roman (ed.), Staat und Gesellschaft: Studien über Lorenz von Stein (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1978), pp. 405–17Google Scholar.

9 Meyer, Georg, Lehrbuch des deutschen Verwaltungsrechtes (2nd edn, Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1893), vol. 1: p. 7, and vol. 2: pp. 568, 570.Google Scholar

10 Cassese, Sabino, ‘Global Standards for National Administrative Procedure’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 65:3–4 (2005), p. 112fGoogle Scholar; Kingsbury, Benedict, Krisch, Nico, and Stewart, Richard B., ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 68:3–4 (2005), pp. 16–18, 25f.Google Scholar

11 von Sarway, Otto, Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht (Freiburg: Mohr, 1887)Google Scholar; Stein, ‘Einige Bemerkungen über das internationale Verwaltungsrecht’, pp. 395–442; see also Fried, Alfred H., Das internationale Leben der Gegenwart (Leipzig: Teubner, 1908), pp. 21–4Google Scholar.

12 The treatise immediately appeared in both French and German translations: Fedor Fedorovich Martens (F. de Martens), Traité de droit international, trans. Albert Leo (Paris: Librairie Marescq ainé, 1883–7); and Völkerrecht: das internationale Recht der civilisirten Nationen: systematisch dargestellt, trans. Carl Bergbohm (Berlin: Weidmann Buchhandlung, 1883–6).

13 Kazansky, Pierre, ‘Théorie de l'administration internationale’, Revue générale de droit international public, 9 (1902), pp. 355–7Google Scholar; Hudson, Manley O., ‘The Development of International Law since the War’, American Journal of International Law, 22:2 (1928), pp. 330–50, esp. 339–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Lassa Oppenheim's International Law: A Treatise (1905) introduced the term in English.

14 Codding, George A. Jr, The International Telecommunication Union: An Experiment in International Cooperation (Leiden: Brill, 1952), pp. 13–21Google Scholar. See also Geßner, Ludwig, ‘Die beiden Weltvereine für den Post- und Telegraphenverkehr’, Archiv für öffentliches Recht, 2 (1887), pp. 220–6Google Scholar; Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 28–32; Lyall, Francis, International Communications: The International Telecommunication Union and the Universal Postal Union (Farnham: Ashgate: 2011), pp. 18–23Google Scholar; Meyer, Lehrbuch des deutschen Verwaltungsrechtes, vol. 2, pp. 597–602; Rolland, Louis, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique dans les relations internationales (Paris: Pedone, 1901), pp. 134–46Google Scholar; and Saveney, Edgar, ‘La télégraphie internationale’ (part 1), Revue des deux mondes, vol. 101 (15 September 1872), pp. 363–8Google Scholar.

15 Convention télégraphique internationale conclue à Paris, le 17 mai 1865 …, in Parry, Clive (ed.), The Consolidated Treaty Series, 130 (Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana, 1969–81), p. 213Google Scholar. Hereafter cited CTS.

16 Boisson, La Société des Nations et les Bureaux Internationaux des Unions Universelles Postale et Télégraphique, pp. 11–21; Codding, The International Telecommunication Union, pp. 20–30; Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 55–73; Lyall, International Communications, pp. 25–37; and Rolland, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique, pp. 151–9, 166–74.

17 The organisation created in 1874 was called the ‘Union postale générale’ (‘General Postal Union’). In June 1878, it became the ‘Union postale universelle’ (‘Universal Postal Union’), which is still the name today. In this article, I simply call the organisation the UPU. On the history of the UPU, see Balmer, Albrecht, ‘Foundation and Growth of the Universal Postal Union’, L'Union postale, 57:1 (1932), pp. 1–12Google Scholar; Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 14–39; Codding, George A. Jr, The Universal Postal Union: Coordinator of the International Mails (New York: New York University Press, 1964), pp. 20–47Google Scholar; and Ranaivoson, L'union postale universelle (UPU) et la constitution d'un territoire postal unique, pp. 44–66.

18 Balmer, ‘Foundation and Growth of the Universal Postal Union’, pp. 5–8; Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 40–53; Geßner, ‘Die beiden Weltvereine für den Post- und Telegraphenverkehr’, pp. 235–41; Ranaivoson, L'union postale universelle, pp. 104–28, 190, 197.

19 Boisson, La Société des Nations et les Bureaux Internationaux, pp. 19–21; Clark, Keith, International Communications: The American Attitude (New York: Columbia University Press, 1931), pp. 96–8, 105–8Google Scholar; Codding, The International Telecommunication Union, pp. 48–52, 57–9; Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 74–82, 85–9, 107–15; and Moynier, Gustave, Les bureaux internationaux des unions universelles (Genève: A. Cherbuliez, 1892), pp. 13–36Google Scholar.

20 Boisson, La Société des Nations et les Bureaux Internationaux, pp. 5–12; Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 96–101, 135–46; Lyall, International Communications, pp. 234–42; and Ranaivoson, L'union postale universelle, pp. 60–5.

21 Documents du Congrès Postal International réuni à Berne du 15 Septembre au 9 Octobre 1874 (Berne: Rieder & Simmen, 1875), pp. 33, 65f, 80f, 91, 106; Union Postale Universelle, Documents du Congrès Postal de Paris, 1878 (Berne: Lang & Co., 1878), p. 75Google Scholar.

22 Herren, Madeleine, Hintertüren zur Macht: Internationalismus und modernisierungsorientierte Außenpolitik in Belgien, der Schweiz, und den USA, 1865–1914 (München: Oldenbourg, 2000), pp. 237–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Herren, Madeleine, ‘Governmental Internationalism and the Beginning of a New World Order in the Late Nineteenth Century’, in Geyer, Martin H. and Paulmann, Johannes (eds), The Mechanics of Internationalism: Culture, Society, and Politics from the 1840s to the First World War (London: German Historical Institute; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 123, 133Google Scholar; Rolland, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique, p. 230.

23 Clark, International Communications, p. 102f; Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 45–8; Rolland, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique, pp. 206–10.

24 Codding, The International Telecommunication Union, 39f; Kasansky, ‘L'Union télégraphique internationale’, pp. 181–3; and Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 93–9. For an example of policy centralisation in the General Post Office, see the 1879 correspondence between the Indo-European Telegraph Office and the GPO regarding code words for the telegraph: India Office Records (British Library), file IOR:L/PWD/7/172.

25 Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 73, 76–9, 83f, 88–90; Boisson, La Société des Nations et les Bureaux Internationaux, p. 17.

26 Documents du Congrès … 1878, pp. 18f, 76f, 509.

27 Ibid., pp. 79f, 109–16, 142–6; and Art. XXVIII of the 1878 Règlement, in CTS, vol. 152: p. 258f.

28 Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 123–9; See Claveirole, Jean, L'internationalisme et l'organisation international administrative (Saint-Étienne: A. Waton, 1910), p. 98Google Scholar; Documents du Congrès … 1878, p. 596f.; and Laborie, Léonard, L'Europe mise en réseaux: La France et la coopération internationale dans les postes et les télécommunications (années 1850 – années 1950) (Bruxelles: Peter Lang, 2010), p. 117fGoogle Scholar. Léon Chaubert has called this ‘tacit ratification’; see L'union postale universelle: son statut juridique, sa structure et son fonctionnement (Berne: Herbert Lang & CIE, 1970), pp. 27–30. By contrast, the 1874 Congress was quite exacting about the ‘full powers’ of delegates; see Documents du Congrès … 1874, p. 19f; Art. XVIII of the 1874 Treaty, in CTS, vol. 147: p. 142; and Art. XIX and ‘Final Protocol’ of the 1878 Convention, in CTS, vol. 152: pp. 242, 244f.

29 Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 56f, 60, 102–7. On the growing role of experts in the ITU and UPU, see Laborie, L'Europe mise en réseaux, pp. 120–2, 400–6; and Lyall, International Communications, pp. 8–11.

30 Bühler, Der Weltpostverein, pp. 116–22; Turmann, Max, ‘Un type de convention et d'organisation internationales: l'Union postale universelle’, Hommage de la Faculté de droit de l'Université de Fribourg à la Société suisse des jurists à l'occasion de sa 59me assemblée générale à Fribourg les 29 et 30 septembre 1924 (Fribourg: Librairie de l'université, 1924), p. 72fGoogle Scholar.

31 See the ‘Convention postale entre l'Autriche-Hongrie et la Grèce’, in CTS, vol. 152: pp. 304–9.

32 Gustave Moynier noted that the occasional absence of unanimity in the UPU was solved by diverting certain business matters to the Arrangements; see Les bureaux internationaux des unions universelles, p. 40.

33 Documents du Congrès Postal … 1874, pp. 48–50; Documents du Congrès Postal … 1878, p. 482f.

34 Documents du Congrès Postal … 1874, pp. 32, 64, 89, 490f.

35 Kneisel, Sebastian, Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in internationalen Verwaltungsunionen (1874–1914) (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2009), pp. 17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Rolland, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique, pp. 248–73.

36 ‘International Jurisprudence’, Union postale, 2:10 (1 October 1877), pp. 214–7.

37 Archer, International Organizations, p. 36f.

38 See Myers, Denys P., Non-Sovereign Representation in Public International Organs (Bruxelles: Congress mondiale des associations internationales, 1913), pp. 14f, 19Google Scholar; Myers, Denys P., ‘Representation in Public International Organs’, American Journal of International Law, 8:1 (1914), pp. 81–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Claveirole, L'internationalisme, pp. 98–103; Herren, Madeleine, Internationale Organisationen seit 1865: Eine Globalgeschichte der internationalen Ordnung (Darmstadt: WBG, 2009), p. 36Google Scholar; Sayre, Francis Bowes, Experiments in International Administration (New York: Harper & Bros., 1919), p. 24Google Scholar; Woolf, L. S., International Government: Two Reports (New York: Brentano's, 1916), p. 199Google Scholar.

39 Simpson, Gerry, Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 258CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Laborie, L'Europe mise en réseaux, p. 152; Lyall, International Communications, p. 236.

41 Codding, The International Telecommunication Union, 98–100; and Lyall, International Communications, pp. 59f, 74.

42 Myers, Non-Sovereign Representation in Public International Organs, p. 2f.

43 Kingsbury, Krisch, and Stewart, ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, pp. 16–26, 31–7.

44 Vec, Recht und Normierung in der industriellen Revolution, pp. 152–5.

45 Neumeyer, Karl, ‘Les unions internationales’, Revue de droit international de science diplomatiques, politiques, et sociales, 2 (1924), pp. 21, 35, and 3 (1925), p. 105Google Scholar; Kazansky, ‘Théorie de l'administration internationale’, pp. 353–9.

46 Vec, Recht und Normierung in der industriellen Revolution, p. 134f.; see also Rapisardi-Mirabelli, ‘Théorie générale des unions internationales’, pp. 358–61.

47 Meyer, Lehrbuch des deutschen Verwaltungsrechtes, vol. 2: p. 570. See also Cassese, ‘Global Standards for National Administrative Procedure’, p. 112f.

48 Geßner, ‘Die beiden Weltvereine für den Post-und Telegraphenverkehr’, pp. 222, 236f.

49 Kingsbury, Krisch, and Stewart, ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, p. 25f.; Slaughter, Anne-Marie, A New World Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), pp. 12–15Google Scholar; Grewal, David Singh, Network Power: The Social Dynamics of Globalization (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), pp. 50, 235, 264fGoogle Scholar; McDowell, Stephen D., ‘Understanding Shifts in the Form and Scope of Telecommunications’, in Rosenau, James N. and Singh, J. P. (eds), Information Technologies and Global Politics (Albany: SUNY Press, 2002), pp. 211–37Google Scholar.

50 Slaughter, A New World Order, pp. 10, 18, 222–5, 231–5, 244; and Slaughter, Anne-Marie, ‘The Accountability of Government Networks’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 8:2 (2001), pp. 347–67Google Scholar.

51 Slaughter, A New World Order, pp. 227–30, 245–7; and Slaughter, Anne-Marie, ‘Sovereignty and Power in a Networked World Order’, Stanford Journal of International Law, 40 (2004), pp. 283–327Google Scholar.

52 Murphy, Craig N., International Organization and Industrial Change: Global Governance since 1850 (Cambridge: Polity, 1994), pp. 168–70Google Scholar; Slaughter, A New World Order, p. 246; and Grewal, Network Power, pp. 247–65.

53 Murphy, Craig N. and Yates, JoAnne, The International Organization for Standardization (ISO): Global Governance through Voluntary Consensus (London: Routledge, 2009)Google Scholar. See also Prakash, Aseem and Potoski, Matthew, ‘The International Organization for Standardization as a Global Governor: A Club Theory Perspective’, in Avant, Deborah D., Finnemore, Martha, and Sell, Susan K. (eds), Who Governs the Globe? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 71–101Google Scholar.

54 Murphy, International Organization and Industrial Change, p. 42f.; see also his Global Institutions, Marginalization, and Development (London: Routledge, 2005), pp. 34–42.

55 Murphy, International Organization and Industrial Change, pp. 1–4, 84–6; Archer, International Organizations, pp. 10–4, 29; Herren, ‘Governmental Internationalism’, pp. 121–44; and Reinalda, Routledge History of International Organizations, pp. 30–3, 90–3.

56 Howland, Douglas, ‘Telegraph Technology and Administrative Internationalism in the 19th Century’, in Mayer, Maximilian, Carpes, Mariana, and Knoblich, Ruth (eds), International Relations and the Global Politics of Science and Technology (Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag), forthcoming 2014Google Scholar.

57 Codding, Jr, The Universal Postal Union, p. 28; Lyall, International Communications, p. 233f; Pashukanis, Evgeny, The General Theory of Law and Marxism (New Brunswick: Transaction, 2002), p. 81Google Scholar; Renault, Louis, ‘Les unions internationales: leurs avantages et leurs inconvénients’, Revue générale de droit international public, 3 (1896), p. 15fGoogle Scholar; Ruggie, J. G., ‘Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution’, International Organization, 46:3 (1992), pp. 561–98, esp. pp. 564f, 576f)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Vec, Recht und Normierung in der industriellen Revolution, pp. 83, 128; Vec, Miloš, ‘Die Bindungswirkung von Standards aus rechtsgeschichtlicher Perspektive: Globale Normsetzung und Normimplementation am Beispiel des Weltpostvereins von 1878’, in Möllers, Thomas M. J. (ed.), Geltung und Faktizität von Standards (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2009), pp. 221–51, esp. 231, 243fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 Chaubert, L'union postale universelle, pp. 31–6; Horn, Frank, Reservations and Interpretive Declarations to Multilateral Treaties (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1988), pp. 8–13Google Scholar; Kühner, Rolf, Vorbehalte zu multilateralen völkerrechtlichen Verträgen (Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1986), pp. 53–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lyons, F.S.L., Internationalism in Europe, 1815–1914 (Leyden: Sythoff. 1963), pp. 22, 24–9Google Scholar; McNair, Arnold D., ‘International Legislation’, Iowa Law Review, 19:2 (1934), p. 178fGoogle Scholar; Miller, David Hunter, Reservations to Treaties: Their Effect and the Procedure in Regard Thereto (n.p., 1919), pp. 90–5, 132–42Google Scholar.

60 Renault, ‘Les unions internationales’, p. 23.

61 Grewal, Network Power, pp. 4–7, 194–203. See also Laborie, L'Europe mise en réseaux, pp. 110f, 404.

62 Bull, Hedley, ‘The Grotian Conception of International Society’, repr. in Alderson, Kai and Hurrell, Andrew (eds), Hedley Bull on International Society (Houndmills: Macmillan, 2000 [orig. pub. 1966]), pp. 95–118, esp. pp. 113–17Google Scholar; Hurrell, Andrew, ‘International Law and the Making and Unmaking of Boundaries’, in Buchanan, Allen and Moore, Margaret (eds), States, Nations, and Borders: The Ethics of Making Boundaries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 275–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kingsbury, Benedict, ‘The Administrative Law Frontier in Global Governance’, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, 99 (2005), pp. 143–53Google Scholar; and Kingsbury, Benedict, ‘Omnilateralism and Partial International Communities’, Kokusaihō gaikō zasshi, 104:1 (2005), pp. 98–124Google Scholar.

63 Kingsbury, ‘Omnilateralism and Partial International Communities’, p. 99.

64 Rolland, De la correspondance postale et télégraphique, pp. 187–9.

65 Ibid., pp. 182f, 197–9, 226.

66 Codding, The International Telecommunication Union, p. 45f; Kasansky, ‘L'Union télégraphique internationale’, p. 183; and Kunz, Die internationalen Telegraphen-Unionen, pp. 99–102. See also Mangone, A Short History of International Organization, p. 4; at p. 76, Mangone argues that a major shift took place with an 1872 amendment that specified that if a contracting administration did not reply within four months to a technical question or regulation to which it had been referred, its agreement would be considered as accepted.

67 Riches, Cromwell A., Majority Rule in International Organization: A Study of the Trend from Unanimity to Majority Decision (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1940), pp. 59–76Google Scholar; Myers, ‘Representation in Public International Organs’, pp. 87–92; Claude, Inis L. Jr, Swords into Plowshares: The Problems and Progress of International Organization (4th edn, New York: Random House, 1971), pp. 118–22Google Scholar; McNair, ‘International Legislation’, p. 179f; Sayre, Experiments in International Administration, pp. 150–4.

68 See, for example, Lorca, Arnulf Becker, ‘Sovereignty Beyond the Law: The End of Classical International Law’, Journal of the History of International Law, 13:1 (2011), pp. 47–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States, pp. 132–54.