Carl Schmitt and the Challenges of Interwar Internationalism. Against Weimar–Geneva–Versailles

Abstract

In the aftermath of World War I, liberal internationalist politicians and intellectuals attempted to lay the ground for a new world order, based on trade and law. Their ambitious project entailed the building of international institutions, as well as the formal outlawing of war with the Kellogg-Briand Pact in 1928. Among the fiercest critics of the liberal internationalist project of the interwar years was the near-infamous German jurist Carl Schmitt. Today, Schmitt’s thought is regularly referenced as an inspiration behind twenty-first century anti-globalism and its attempts at reinforcing national sovereignty and ‘take back control’ from international institutions. However, Schmitt did not believe that a return to the principles of statehood from before World War I was possible. Rather than an order based on nineteenth century principles regarding the nation state, he advocated the formation of a new political world order that would be able to face the forces of modernity and internationalism. In this article, I chart the challenges of interwar internationalism as Schmitt saw them, together with his alternative solution. Schmitt’s alternative entails a recognition of how international and national order has become entangled in a complex way, forcing the rethinking of traditional conceptions of statehood.