ABSTRACT
Since September 11, many commentators have noted the growing divergence of world view between Europe and the United States. One of the most widely quoted characterizations of this divergence is that of Robert Kagan (2002, 2003). Kagan contrasts what he sees as the American Hobbesian world view, in which military power is the key factor, with the European Kantian view, which places the emphasis on the extension of international law. The former view considers the Hobbesian idea of a state of nature, a ‘war of every man against every man’, as continuing to apply to the inter-state world. A superpower, asserting its military might whenever and however it deems necessary, is therefore the only possible way to keep order and keep anarchy at bay. The Kantian view favours a law-based approach to maintaining international peace and justice, believing that peaceful and rights-based states cannot exist in isolation in a world where ‘might is right’. ‘The problem of establishing a perfect civil constitution is subordinate to the problem of a law-governed external relationship with other states, and cannot be solved unless the latter is also solved’ (Kant [1784] 1991: 45, 47). According to Kagan, the Kantian approach is typical of weak states.
