Zur Entwicklung von Kriegsrecht und Kriegsverhütung im Völkerrecht des 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts*

Today's global law of nations is the direct result of the international legal order of 'civilised nations'. This order was constituted in the nineteenth century by mainly Christian European and American states, but was also embraced by some non-Christian powers (since Turkey had entered into the 'European concert' in 1856). By this time, the just war theory had nearly disappeared, and sovereign states claimed the exclusive right to resort to war (ius ad bellum). The traditional European laws of war (ius in bello) were partly modified by treaties, such as those signed at the Paris Peace Conference of 1856 and at the Geneva Convention of 1864. During the late nineteenth century, there were numerous proposals for and steps towards international congresses and conferences, neutralisation of territories and waterways, and, last but not least, codification of international laws. At this time, the political peace movement, which had begun in the early nineteenth century in the USA and in England, was expanding to the whole 'civilized' world and was winning considerable influence on public opinion. Because of the changes, the Hague peace conferences of 1899 and 1907 were not only popular, but were also able to produce a number of important conventions. Especially important were conventions concerning the peaceful settlement of international disputes (including arbitration), the laws and customs of war on land, and neutrality law. Yet finding consensus on a general regulation of warfare at sea was not possible, and the intended restriction of armaments proved to be a failure. Additionally, the London Naval Conference of 1908/9 also did not reach its aims. State practice in World War I often did not correspond to the international legal order that many observers had thought to be realised already at the beginning of the twentieth century.