Off to sleep now, perchance to dream

Dear Century + 1 Club,

A recent lecture has provided me with a humbling experience and kicked me off the supposed high horse (miniature pony might be more like it?) I had mounted. I cannot recall learning in great detail anything about international law. I know law as a concept exists to provide a framework in which society operates. I know there is domestic law and I know there is international...in between these two levels (which do not necessarily like vertically but more diagonally to each other) there is a whole slew of Latin phrases. I know that international law is seen as "weak" and "futile" due to its inability to efficiently enforce what it originally sought to achieve.

States are most often compelled to abide by international rules and regulations the following reasons (including but not limited to):

• diplomatic relations (think reciprocity)
• power of public opinion
• possibility of sanctions
• threat of the use of force

Sometimes however, states still choose not to. So what then? What I think THE most fundamental part of international law is its use as an advocacy tool. While critics of international law as it stands today will say that there is no "global police force," I strongly believe that people in both big and small numbers are one of the most powerful means of affecting change. Take the Declaration of Human Rights for example...though this document is purely aspirational and not legally binding to any of the signatories, it is a pivotal instrument when garnering attention to many issues (E.g. the death penalty in Singapore).

The end.

PS. Congrats to you and me for getting to one hundred and one!

\