This paper takes as its opening prism – looking back – the mid-war vision of a post-war world that framed the emergence of the present-day architecture of international law, and moves from there – looking forward – to consider whether that architecture remains fit for purpose and, if not, how it might be reconceived to meet the challenges of the longer term. Against the backdrop of a ‘contested world’, the paper addresses the contrasting systemic visions of the period to come and proposes a framework for reconceiving the international legal order to better meet the challenges of the next 75 years. The prism of 2100 is a device to look beyond the acute and chronic challenges of the moment, away from the here and now, towards the challenges of the deeper long term. It proposes that a sense of direction for the future requires a vision of the horizon, not simply of next steps.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniel Bethlehem (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: