1 Chi J Intl L 1 (2000)
Paul W. Kahn

The tension between our conception of the nation as an expression of popular sovereignty under law and the international legal order of rights is likely to have deep effects on the development of international law. We cannot import into law hierarchies of power without undermining the normative claim of law. A law asymmetrical in its reach and application does not appear to be law at all. This means that, with respect to just those potential conflicts that the United States sees as grounding the necessity of the maintenance of its own power, law is not likely to have a mitigating effect. The project of a global order of law founded on universal rights will be seen as a Western project, a kind of cultural imperialism doing work for a more traditional political imperialism. Nor is this view completely wrong. To the degree that we believe in the values for which the United States stands -- values of democracy, law, and markets -- we should support these assertions of power. But we should not think that framing the issue as one of international law somehow eliminates politics or delegitimates opposing claims.