The moral purpose of the state: Social identity, legitimate action, and the construction of international institutions

This study seeks to explain why different systems of sovereign states have created different types of fundamental institutions to govern relations between their constituent units. Why, for instance, did the Ancient Greeks operate a successful system of third-party interstate arbitration in the absence of a body of codified law while the governance of Modern international society rests on precisely such a system of law combined with multilateral diplomacy? Existing explanations of basic institutional practices cannot account for this variation. The following chapters present a 'constructivist' theory of international institutional development, which emphasizes the relationship between the social identity of the state and the nature and origin of basic institutional practices. Contrary to the conventional assumption that the identity of the state and its realm of legitimate action are defined by the principle of sovereignty, the author argues that legitimate statehood and rightful state action are determined by historically and culturally specific values concerning the moral purpose of the state. These values originate in the domestic political cultures of dominant states, but they become embedded in the normative fabric of international society, conditioning the behavior of strong and weak states alike. Once institutionalized, these values define the state's realm of legitimate action. In particular, they constitute and constrain institutional design and action, leading states to create particular types of international institutions and not others. As the social identity of the state varies from one historical context to another, so too do international societies' fundamental institutions. This thesis is demonstrated through a structured comparison of the Modern society of states with its two great historical analogues: the city-state systems of Ancient Greece and Renaissance Italy. The study concludes by considering the implications of the author's argument about the relationship between state identity and the nature of international societies for understanding contemporary patterns of international continuity and change.