Carl Schmitt, Nomos of the Earth, and the Question of Historic Title in International Law

The Western international law of territory starts from a standpoint of the priority of the State over its population. The latter is merely an object of the ownership of the State. Title to territory rests on dominant evidence of State activity. The activity of so-called private individuals or economic activity of peoples do not count towards title to territory in the case law of international tribunals. This article contests the foundations of such a perspective. The so-called Western law of territory was devised by Western States to divide up among themselves the territory of non-Western ‘non-peoples’, culminating in the racist Island of Palmas Arbitration. Carl Schmitt provides the makings of an alternative history of the law of territory. It is, and should be, the law of the homelands of peoples, historically located on particular spaces. Peoples precede States, which are merely institutions used by Peoples to protect and administer their homelands. Whatever the difficulties of locating the homelands to which Peoples belong, escape into the so-called Western law of territory as a way to ‘Peace through the Rule of Law’ is an illusion – described contemptuously by the political theorist Raymond Aron as a Law of empty spaces. Without justice, there is no law.