peace of westphalia essay

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law

International Relations

• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Peace of Westphalia (1648)

Introduction, general overviews.

• Primary Sources
• Bibliography
• Collections of Articles
• The Holy Roman Empire
• The Emperor, France, and Sweden
• Other Foreign Powers
• Long-Term Effects of the 1998 Anniversary
• Implementation
• Interpretations and Receptions
• The State System

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Peace of Utrecht
• Post-Conflict and Transitional Justice
• Sovereignty

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Crisis Bargaining
• History of Brazilian Foreign Policy (1808 to 1945)
• Indian Foreign Policy
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Peace of Westphalia (1648) by Anuschka Tischer LAST REVIEWED: 28 July 2021 LAST MODIFIED: 28 July 2021 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0073

The Peace of Westphalia, concluded in 1648 in Münster (Germany), ended the Thirty Years’ War, which started with an anti-Habsburg revolt in Bohemia in 1618 but became an entanglement of different conflicts concerning the constitution of the Holy Roman Empire, religion, and the state system of Europe. This contest was a civil “German war,” but foreign powers played a crucial role. The Peace of Westphalia ended with the signing of two treaties between the empire and the new great powers, Sweden and France, and settled the conflicts inside the empire with their guarantees. A new electorate was established for the exiled son of the revolt’s leader, the elector Palatine. Bavaria kept the electorate that it had been given for its support of the emperor Ferdinand II during the revolt. This compromise in 1648 meant a change of the empire’s fundamental Golden Bull of 1356 and was a symbol that all conflicts occurring since 1618 were resolved and that those who made peace did not avoid radical cuts and invented fresh ideas in order to make peace. Catholics and Protestants (now including Calvinists as well as Lutherans) accepted each other. Several regulations guaranteed their balance: 1624 was declared the “normal year” of any territory’s denomination, minorities were tolerated or had a right to emigrate, and no one could be forced to convert any longer. The Peace of Westphalia is regarded as a milestone in the development toward tolerance and secularization. This settlement also strengthened the imperial Estates: they could enter into foreign alliances and decide important matters, such as peace and war, along with the emperor. The suspected ambition of the Habsburgs for a “universal monarchy” was thereby controlled, in particular because the Franco-Spanish negotiations in Münster did not bring peace between France and Spain and left open conflict areas, such as Lorraine. Moreover, France and Sweden got territorial “satisfaction,” especially in Alsace and Pomerania. The Peace of Westphalia also confirmed the legal independence of the Swiss Confederation, whereas by a separate peace with Spain, in Münster, the United Provinces of the Netherlands officially became a sovereign state after eighty years of war. The Peace of Westphalia was crucial in German and international history. Its precise role in the European state system and international law is, however, subject to controversy, such as the debate over the “Westphalian System” in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Controversies about the Peace of Westphalia are not new. The history of its reception and interpretation is as long as the history of its emergence. Unquestionably, though, the negotiations were a milestone in diplomacy and peacemaking. Sources on the peace are most valuable for always changing methods and perspectives of history. Research on the Peace of Westphalia increased enormously with its 350th anniversary in 1998 and its several conferences and exhibitions.

The most recent scholarly monograph on the Westphalian negotiations and peace is Croxton 2013 . Dickmann 1998 (originally published in 1959) is still valuable due to the author’s long-term archive research, although it lacks many current aspects and is sometimes even contrary to later research. The sometimes still-quoted Kopp and Schulte 1940 is an unacceptable work of Nazi propaganda. Repgen 1999 covers the main problems of the negotiations and how they were solved in the peace. Westphal 2015 and Brunert 2017 give an overview on the basis of the latest research with a focus on the peace process. Some monographs on the Thirty Years’ War also offer information on the peace ( Parker 1997 , Wilson 2009 , Asbach and Schröder 2014 ), but they are more focused on the wider political or military frame, or both. Croxton and Tischer 2002 , a reference work, includes the variety of new research being done in the late 1990s and provides short explanations of terms, persons, topics, and so on that concern the Peace of Westphalia.

Asbach, Olaf, and Peter Schröder, eds. The Ashgate Research Companion to the Thirty Years’ War . Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2014.

Impressive presentation of the war and its several aspects, including the Peace of Westphalia, by various international scholars. A perfect introduction into the current state of research on the Thirty Years’ War.

Brunert, Maria-Elisabeth. “Der Westfälische Frieden 1648: Eine Friedensordnung für das Reich und Europa.” In Friedensordnungen in geschichtswissenschaftlicher und geschichtsdidaktischer Perspektive . Edited by Peter Geiss and Peter Arnold Heuser, 69–95. Wissenschaft und Lehrerbildung 2. Göttingen, Germany: V & R Academic, 2017.

The article, based on a very deep knowledge of the sources and recent research, gives an overview over the Congress and Peace of Westphalia. The focus is on the role of the Peace of Westphalia in the development of a peace order in Germany and Europe.

Croxton, Derek. Westphalia: The Last Christian Peace . Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.

DOI: 10.1057/9781137333339

Thorough monograph on the Congress and Peace of Westphalia by a recognized expert on the subject. Essential for everyone who is looking for a comprehensive overview in English.

Croxton, Derek, and Anuschka Tischer. The Peace of Westphalia: A Historical Dictionary . Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2002.

Reference work that offers short explanations and related literature on terms, persons, places, and so on relative to the Peace of Westphalia. Useful selected bibliography.

Dickmann, Fritz. Der Westfälische Frieden . 7th ed. Münster, Germany: Aschendorff Verlag, 1998.

Originally published in 1959, this is the only scholarly monograph on the Peace of Westphalia. Although it lacks more than half a century of research and is obsolete in many details, it is an unsurpassed overview. Dickmann even refers to topics that only later became the subject of research (e.g., public media, ceremony).

Kopp, Friedrich, and Eduard Schulte. Der Westfälische Frieden: Vorgeschichte, Verhandlungen, Folgen . Munich: Hoheneichen-Verlag, 1940.

What at the first glance might look just like an old-fashioned but rare overview of the Peace of Westphalia is actually anti-French Nazi propaganda. Because of its high circulation, the book is still widespread but should definitely not be used as research literature.

Parker, Geoffrey, ed. The Thirty Years’ War . 2d ed. London: Routledge, 1997.

The instructive book, written by several experts, is much quoted for the Thirty Years’ War, the Peace of Westphalia, and the history of its reception. One should be aware, however, that it does not include the very fruitful research of the last two decades.

Repgen, Konrad. “Die Hauptprobleme der Westfälischen Friedensverhandlungen von 1648 und ihre Lösungen.” Zeitschrift für Bayerische Landesgeschichte 62 (1999): 399–438.

Concise and instructive article on all important problems of the negotiations and their outcome in the Peace of Westphalia. A similar but shorter English article by Repgen can be found in Volume 1 of Bussmann and Schilling 1998 (cited under Collections of Articles ).

Westphal, Siegrid. Der Westfälische Frieden . Munich, Germany: C. H. Beck, 2015.

DOI: 10.17104/9783406683039

The short book gives a very dense overview over the Peace of Westphalia. The focus lies in particular on the peace process and its mechanisms.

Wilson, Peter H. The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.

This huge and solid monograph on the Thirty Years’ War includes chapters on the Westphalian peace congress and the aftermath. The focus is strictly on the great political decisions and military development, so the book does not offer a thorough inside view of the negotiations or the peace.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About International Relations »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Academic Theories of International Relations Since 1945
• Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
• Arab-Israeli Wars
• Arab-Israeli Wars, 1967-1973, The
• Armed Conflicts/Violence against Civilians Data Sets
• Arms Control
• Asylum Policies
• Audience Costs and the Credibility of Commitments
• Authoritarian Regimes
• Balance of Power Theory
• Bargaining Theory of War
• Brazilian Foreign Policy, The Politics of
• Canadian Foreign Policy
• Case Study Methods in International Relations
• Casualties and Politics
• Causation in International Relations
• Central Europe
• Challenge of Communism, The
• China and Japan
• China's Defense Policy
• China’s Foreign Policy
• Chinese Approaches to Strategy
• Cities and International Relations
• Civil Resistance
• Civil Society in the European Union
• Cold War, The
• Colonialism
• Comparative Foreign Policy Security Interests
• Comparative Regionalism
• Complex Systems Approaches to Global Politics
• Conflict Behavior and the Prevention of War
• Conflict Management
• Conflict Management in the Middle East
• Constructivism
• Contemporary Shia–Sunni Sectarian Violence
• Counterinsurgency
• Countermeasures in International Law
• Coups and Mutinies
• Criminal Law, International
• Critical Theory of International Relations
• Cuban Missile Crisis, The
• Cultural Diplomacy
• Cyber Security
• Cyber Warfare
• Decision-Making, Poliheuristic Theory of
• Demobilization, Post World War I
• Democracies and World Order
• Democracy and Conflict
• Democracy in World Politics
• Deterrence Theory
• Development
• Digital Diplomacy
• Diplomacy, Gender and
• Diplomacy, History of
• Diplomacy in the ASEAN
• Diplomacy, Public
• Disaster Diplomacy
• Diversionary Theory of War
• Drone Warfare
• Eastern Front (World War I)
• Economic Coercion and Sanctions
• Economics, International
• Embedded Liberalism
• Emerging Powers and BRICS
• Empirical Testing of Formal Models
• Energy and International Security
• Environmental Peacebuilding
• Epidemic Diseases and their Effects on History
• Ethics and Morality in International Relations
• Ethnicity in International Relations
• European Migration Policy
• European Security and Defense Policy, The
• European Union as an International Actor
• European Union, International Relations of the
• Experiments
• Face-to-Face Diplomacy
• Fascism, The Challenge of
• Feminist Methodologies in International Relations
• Feminist Security Studies
• Food Security
• Forecasting in International Relations
• Foreign Aid and Assistance
• Foreign Direct Investment
• Foreign Policy Decision-Making
• Foreign Policy of Non-democratic Regimes
• Foreign Policy of Saudi Arabia
• Foreign Policy, Theories of
• French Empire, 20th-Century
• From Club to Network Diplomacy
• Future of NATO
• Game Theory and Interstate Conflict
• Gender and Terrorism
• Genocide, Politicide, and Mass Atrocities Against Civilian...
• Genocides, 20th Century
• Geopolitics and Geostrategy
• Germany in World War II
• Global Citizenship
• Global Civil Society
• Global Constitutionalism
• Global Environmental Politics
• Global Ethic of Care
• Global Governance
• Global Justice, Western Perspectives
• Globalization
• Governance of the Arctic
• Grand Strategy
• Greater Middle East, The
• Greek Crisis
• Hague Conferences (1899, 1907)
• Hierarchies in International Relations
• History and International Relations
• Human Nature in International Relations
• Human Rights
• Human Rights and Humanitarian Diplomacy
• Human Rights, Feminism and
• Human Rights Law
• Human Security
• Hybrid Warfare
• Ideal Diplomat, The
• Identity and Foreign Policy
• Ideology, Values, and Foreign Policy
• Illicit Trade and Smuggling
• Imperialism
• Indian Perspectives on International Relations, War, and C...
• Indigenous Rights
• Industrialization
• Intelligence
• Intelligence Oversight
• Internal Displacement
• International Conflict Settlements, The Durability of
• International Criminal Court, The
• International Economic Organizations (IMF and World Bank)
• International Health Governance
• International Justice, Theories of
• International Law, Feminist Perspectives on
• International Monetary Relations, History of
• International Negotiation and Conflict Resolution
• International Nongovernmental Organizations
• International Norms for Cultural Preservation and Cooperat...
• International Organizations
• International Relations, Aesthetic Turn in
• International Relations as a Social Science
• International Relations, Practice Turn in
• International Relations, Research Ethics in
• International Relations Theory
• International Security
• International Society
• International Society, Theorizing
• International Support For Nonstate Armed Groups
• Internet Law
• Interstate Cooperation Theory and International Institutio...
• Intervention and Use of Force
• Interviews and Focus Groups
• Iran, Politics and Foreign Policy
• Iraq: Past and Present
• Japanese Foreign Policy
• Just War Theory
• Kurdistan and Kurdish Politics
• Law of the Sea
• Laws of War
• Leadership in International Affairs
• Leadership Personality Characteristics and Foreign Policy
• League of Nations
• Lean Forward and Pull Back Options for US Grand Strategy
• Mediation and Civil Wars
• Mediation in International Conflicts
• Mediation via International Organizations
• Memory and World Politics
• Mercantilism
• Middle East, The Contemporary
• Middle Powers and Regional Powers
• Military Science
• Minorities in the Middle East
• Minority Rights
• Morality in Foreign Policy
• Multilateralism (1992–), Return to
• National Liberation, International Law and Wars of
• National Security Act of 1947, The
• Nation-Building
• Nations and Nationalism
• NATO, Europe, and Russia: Security Issues and the Border R...
• Natural Resources, Energy Politics, and Environmental Cons...
• New Multilateralism in the Early 21st Century
• Nonproliferation and Counterproliferation
• Nonviolent Resistance Datasets
• Normative Aspects of International Peacekeeping
• Normative Power Beyond the Eurocentric Frame
• Nuclear Proliferation
• Peace Education in Post-Conflict Zones
• Peacebuilding, Post-Conflict
• Peacekeeping
• Political Demography
• Political Economy of National Security
• Political Extremism in Sub-Saharan Africa
• Political Learning and Socialization
• Political Psychology
• Politics and Islam in Turkey
• Politics and Nationalism in Cyprus
• Politics of Extraction: Theories and New Concepts for Crit...
• Politics of Resilience
• Popuism and Global Politics
• Popular Culture and International Relations
• Post-Civil War State
• Post-Conflict Reconciliation in the Middle East and North ...
• Power Transition Theory
• Preventive War and Preemption
• Prisoners, Treatment of
• Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs)
• Process Tracing Methods
• Pro-Government Militias
• Proliferation
• Prospect Theory in International Relations
• Psychoanalysis in Global Politics and International Relati...
• Psychology and Foreign Policy
• Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
• Public Opinion and the European Union
• Quantum Social Science
• Race and International Relations
• Rebel Governance
• Reconciliation
• Reflexivity and International Relations
• Religion and International Relations
• Religiously Motivated Violence
• Reputation in International Relations
• Responsibility to Protect
• Rising Powers in World Politics
• Role Theory in International Relations
• Russian Foreign Policy
• Russian Revolutions and Civil War, 1917–1921
• Sanctions in International Law
• Science Diplomacy
• Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945), The
• Secrecy and Diplomacy
• Securitization
• Self-Determination
• Shining Path
• Sinophone and Japanese International Relations Theory
• Small State Diplomacy
• Social Scientific Theories of Imperialism
• Soviet Union in World War II
• Space Strategy, Policy, and Power
• Spatial Dependencies and International Mediation
• State Theory in International Relations
• Status in International Relations
• Strategic Air Power
• Strategic and Net Assessments
• Sub-Saharan Africa, Conflict Formations in
• Sustainable Development
• Systems Theory
• Teaching International Relations
• Territorial Disputes
• Terrorism and Poverty
• Terrorism, Geography of
• Terrorist Financing
• Terrorist Group Strategies
• The Changing Nature of Diplomacy
• The Politics and Diplomacy of Neutrality
• The Politics and Diplomacy of the First World War
• The Queer in/of International Relations
• the Twenty-First Century, Alliance Commitments in
• The Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relation...
• Theories of International Relations, Feminist
• Theory, Chinese International Relations
• Time Series Approaches to International Affairs
• Transnational Actors
• Transnational Law
• Transnational Social Movements
• Tribunals, War Crimes and
• Trust and International Relations
• UN Security Council
• United Nations, The
• United States and Asia, The
• Uppsala Conflict Data Program
• US and Africa
• US–UK Special Relationship
• Voluntary International Migration
• War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714)
• Weapons of Mass Destruction
• Western Balkans
• Western Front (World War I)
• Westphalia, Peace of (1648)
• Women and Peacemaking Peacekeeping
• World Economy 1919-1939
• World Polity School
• World War II Diplomacy and Political Relations
• World-System Theory
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|195.158.225.244]
• 195.158.225.244

How the Peace of Westphalia divided Europe

In 1648, after years of fighting in the brutal Thirty Years' War , the European powers convened to negotiate a series of treaties.

At the center of these negotiations were the two influential treaties of Münster and Osnabrück. For the first time, these agreements saw sovereign states recognizing each other’s boundaries and authority without interference.

This is the story of the Peace of Westphalia, a crucial moment in international history that created the modern Europe that we know today. 

What was the Thirty Years’ War?

The Thirty Years' War began in 1618 and lasted until 1648. This better conflict involved many of the major European powers, including the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, France, Sweden, and Denmark.

At its core, the war started as a religious conflict between Protestant and Catholic states within the Holy Roman Empire.

By 1620, the conflict had escalated significantly, and drew in other European powers seeking to exploit the situation for political and territorial gains. 

In 1635, the war suddenly shifted as France, a key Catholic nation, allied with Protestant states against the Habsburgs.

This cross-religious alliance changed the conflict's nature from primarily faith-based to a political one. The Habsburgs, who ruled both the Holy Roman Empire and Spain, were fighting desperately to maintain their dominance in Europe.

After this point, the war's brutality began to escalate, with mercenary armies causing widespread devastation and famine.

By 1643, all parties involved realized the need for a resolution. 

What happened during the negotiations?

Negotiations for the Peace of Westphalia began in 1644, involving lengthy and arduous diplomatic discussions.

Representatives from all of the major European powers gathered in the Westphalian cities of Münster and Osnabrück.

This was the very first time that such a wide range of participants engaged in a diplomatic effort to end a major conflict.

Cardinal Mazarin of France and Axel Oxenstierna of Sweden became key figures in the discussions, as they sought to create a more stable and balanced political order in Europe. 

However, the process was painfully slow and frequently contentious, as each state sought to protect its own economic and territorial interests.

As well, religious differences further complicated matters. By 1646, two years later, the discussions had progressed, but significant obstacles remained.

Delegates from France, Sweden, Spain, and the Holy Roman Empire debated fiercely over territorial and political issues.

The Swedish delegation, led by Johan Oxenstierna, tried to play a crucial role in mediating between the conflicting parties.

Many minor states within the Holy Roman Empire also participated. 

The two treaties

The two separate treaties of Münster and Osnabrück were finally signed on October 24, 1648, which officially brought an end to the Thirty Years' War.

These agreements collectively became known as the Peace of Westphalia. In the Münster deliberations, France and the Holy Roman Empire were able to negotiate terms that redrew several important territorial boundaries.

Firstly, it confirmed the independence of the Dutch Republic and recognized its sovereignty after decades of bitter conflict with Spain.

As a result of this, the Dutch had finally achieved recognition as a sovereign state, which then allowed it to focus on its burgeoning trade empire.

However, France emerged as a major beneficiary of the negotiations, as it gained control of the region of Alsace. This significantly strengthened France's eastern borders and provided a strategic advantage against the Holy Roman Empire.

Furthermore, France secured powerful new rights in Lorraine. 

In Osnabrück treaty, Sweden and the Holy Roman Empire reached their own agreement. This one granted Sweden control over parts of Pomerania, Bremen, and Verden.

This increased its sphere of influence over key territories along the Baltic Sea. As a growing naval power, these gains helped Sweden prepare for future grabs at power in Europe.

Ultimately, for the Holy Roman Empire and its Emperor Ferdinand III, the territorial losses they suffered in both treaties significantly weakened their dominance in Europe.

Additionally, many of the smaller states who had previously been dominated by the Holy Roman Empire gained greater autonomy.

For example, Bavaria retained the Upper Palatinate, while the Elector Palatine regained his title and part of his territories.

Consequently, the Peace of Westphalia began the slow decline of the Holy Roman Empire's influence in Europe which were to reach its climax in the time of Napoleon . 

The revolutionary religious impacts of the treaties

One of the most important developments from these treaties was the ensured protection of Protestant rights within the Holy Roman Empire.

For the first time, Calvinism received the same legal status as Lutheranism and Catholicism. The treaties ultimately allowed rulers to determine the official religion of their own states, reaffirming the principle of cuius regio, eius religio .

As a result, many Protestant states also gained greater autonomy without fear of punishments from larger countries, which ultimately reduced the Holy Roman emperor's control over religious matters in their regions. 

So, the treaties promoted the modern idea of religious tolerance, which gradually came to influence all European societies.

By reducing the frequency of religious conflicts in this way, the peace agreements helped pave the way for the development of secular governments. 

How Westfalia impacted modern international relations

Prior to the Peace of Westphalia, great empires like the Holy Roman Empire exerted considerable influence over much smaller states.

The negotiations at Westphalia saw an overturning of this system when it recognized the sovereignty of all territories, regardless of size.

Moreover, the treaties encouraged the practice of negotiating peace through diplomacy rather than warfare. This would set a precedent for almost all future conflicts.  

In addition to these changes, the Peace of Westphalia began a new development of international law. By acknowledging the need for mutual recognition and legal equality for all states, it created a set of principles norms that still guide current international relations.

Consequently, the treaties set a precedent for the modern nation-state system. 

What do you need help with?

Download ready-to-use digital learning resources.

Copyright © History Skills 2014-2024.

Contact  via email

Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Outcomes of the peace of westphalia, principles, laid in the treaties, contemporary views, balance of power, compromises, concept of democratic peace.

First of all it should be mentioned, that the Peace of Westphalia is regarded as the first statute, defining the character of international relations for the following centuries within more than two states. The Peace of Westphalia submits to the pair of agreements, the Treaty of Osnabrück and the Treaty of Münster, concluded on May 15 and October 24 of 1648 correspondingly, which ended both the Thirty Years’ War and the Eighty Years’ War. 1 The agreements included the Holy Roman Emperor, Ferdinand III Habsburg, the other German princes, Spain, France, Sweden and plenipotentiaries of the Dutch Republic. The Treaty of the Pyrenees, concluded in 1659, terminating the war between France and Spain, is also often regarded as part of the overall accord.

The France with Ludwig XIV at the head placed the predominant position in the international relations. Austrian and Spanish Habsburgs were its main opponents, but they were weakened by the Thirty Years’ War, and humbled by the provisions of the Peace of Westphalia. Moreover, Spain, after the new unsuccessful war with France had to cede the county of Rusillion and Arras according to The Treaty of the Pyrenees. But Ludwig was not satisfied with these successes, and wishing not only to widen his possessions, but also become the unrestricted reign of the whole Europe, as he was in France. The condition of the French army, perfect in both qualitative and quantitative measure motivated him to undertake the number of wars, and gave hope for the fulfillment of this hope. The other European states could not let Ludwig to bring to life his plans to disturb the political balance in Europe, and created powerful coalitions to confront him. This significantly interrupted Ludwig’s plans (Brown, 2001).

Ludwig led four wars, two of which were aimed to capture Spanish Netherlands (Belgium). It means the possibility of threat for England, and also the superiority in North sea, the threat for Netherlands’ domination, which did not participate in the Thirty Years’ war, and raised its power. Holland, bewaring to have powerful France instead of weak Spain as a neighbor, concluded coalitions against France, attracting Sweden and England. Ludwig’s military successes appeared insufficient. According to the peace of Aachen (1668), France got just several frontier fortresses (Gross, 1948).

Strong commercial rivalry existed between England and Holland. France aggravated the contradictions between England and Spain for the monopoly of trading with America. German empire was fictive. Austria aims to dominate in Germany. Sweden is France’s ally. And Turkey with Poland are Austrian ones. France’s aim is not to allow the union of sea states (England, Holland), to isolate its opponents, by capturing Spanish trade way. 1660 – restoring of Stewards in England. Karl II brakes the union with Madrid, and helps Portugal, and French king Ludwig gets the opportunity to make pressure on Netherlands. The war between England and Holland started in 1664. Netherlands are defeated it, and lose part of the colonies in America, which were called the New England later. Phillip dies in 1665. 1667 – The war against Spain, during which South Netherlands had been captured by the French army. Spain and Holland stop war actions, and create the tripartite political union with Sweden. Then, Ludwig stops his troops, and concludes peace with Spain. Ludwig decided to revenge Holland severely. He interrupted Sweden and England from concluding the union with Holland, and invaded Holland with huge army in 1672 and reached Amsterdam. Hollanders could not resist, and to save the country broke the dams, which surrounded Holland from the side of the sea. The water flooded all the law-lying locations, and the French were made to retreat (Gross, 1948).

Wilhelm the king of Orange created the new coalition, which united all the German lands, and Spain. Ludwig fought this coalition very successfully. As Friedrich -Wilhelm, elector of Brandenburg, was the most dangerous, Ludwig, in order to divert his forces from the theater of war actions, persuaded Sweden to attack Brandenburg possessions from Pomerania. Friedrich hurried to defend Brandenburg, defeated Swedes, and captured part of Pomerania. Since that war lasted approximately 4 years, and ended in 1679. It ended with almost no results. France keeps territory in Flandreau, but Netherlands do not lose independence. They got all their cities, captured by France, back, and France turns the whole Europe against itself (Krasner, 1995).

While France strengthened more and more, German empire, divided into lots of independent territories, weakened more and more. This weakness pushed Ludwig to rambling expansion, leading by the principle of capture. Ludwig captures the cities of Rheine, and also Strasburg. In 1684 Germany Concluded normal treaty with him, according to which declared all the captures, just in order he did not start new ones. In1683 French army conquers Luxemburg, which causes conflict with Vienna. Poland defeats Turkey and Turkish power starts falling. Austria starts leading active anti-France policy. Wilhelm the king of Orange concluded the third coalition against Ludwig. Almost all Western Europe participated in it: German emperor, Spain, Sweden, Holland, Savoy, German and Italian rulers. Only England was on Ludwig’s side, but when English king Jacob II was deposed, and Wilhelm the king of Orange became the king, England became France’s enemy. Ludwig’s capture of Pyrenean lands became the start of the third war, which lasted for ten years (1688-1697). The struggle was persistent, and exhausted both sides, and ended with the Peace of Ryswick 2 . According to the provisions of this agreement Ludwig left Strasburg and other captured cities, but was obliged to declare Wilhelm the king of Orange as the king of England. The dawn of French power started. Though, France ceded not too much, this war ended with all the claims for the dominance of France in Europe (Gross, 1948).

Getting back to the Peace of Westphalia, it would be necessary to emphasize, that it is regarded as one the first great European or world charter. To it is usually featured the significance and distinction of being the first of numerous efforts to institute something resembling world unity on the foundation of states applying unrestricted autonomy over certain lands and subordinated to no possible authority.

The Thirty Years’ War had its origin, at any rate partially, in a religious disagreement or, as one might say, in religious prejudice. The Peace of Westphalia sanctified the standard of toleration by founding the equality among Protestant and Catholic states and by offering some maintains for religious minorities. To be sure, the standard of liberty of principles was related only partly and lacking reciprocity. The religious Peace of Augsburg of 1555 and the rule cujus regio ejus religio were corroborated. With a view to lessening the lot of religious minorities, though, the Treaty of Osnabruck offered that questions who in 1627 had been eliminated from the free realize of their religion, other than of their sovereign, were by the Peace guaranteed the right of performing private reverence, and of educating children, at home or overseas, in conventionality with their own confidence; they were not to bear in any social aptitude nor to be denied religious interment, but were to be at freedom to emigrate, trading their lands and realty or leaving them to be run by others (Osiander, 2001).

The principle of religious parity was set as part of the peace under an worldwide guarantee. The Peace of Westphalia thereby stated an example of far-reaching significance. The Constitution of the Germanic Confederation of June 8, 1815, which grounds part of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of June 9, 1815, specifies in Article XVI that the distinction between the Christian religions should origin no differentiation in the enjoyment by their supporters of civil and political rights, and, in addition, that the German Diet should reflect on the funding of civil rights to Jews on condition that they suppose all civic duties incumbent on other citizen (Osiander, 2001).

In addition to the guarantee, the Settlement of Westphalia formulated certain extremely interesting rules for the peaceful settlement of disputes and collective sanctions against aggressors. Thus the Treaty of Miinster, in Articles 113 and 124 stipulates that:

if it happens that any point should be violated, the Offended shall before all things exhort the Offender not to come to any Hostility, submitting the Cause to a friendly Composition, or the ordinary Proceedings of Justice. Nevertheless, if for the space of three years the Difference cannot be terminated, by any of those means, all and every one of those concerned in this Transaction shall be obliged to join the injured Party, and assist him with Counsel and Force to repel the Injury, being first advertised by the Injured that gentle Means and Justice prevailed nothing; but without prejudice, nevertheless, to every one’s Jurisdiction, and the Administration of Justice conformable to the Laws of each Prince and State; and it shall not be permitted to any State of the Empire to pursue his Right by Force and Arms; but if any difference has happened or happens for the future (between the states of the Empire), every one shall try the means of ordinary Justice, and the Contravener shall be regarded as an Infringer of the Peace. That which has been determined (between the States of the Empire) by Sentence of the Judge, shall be put in execution, without distinction of Condition, as the Laws of the Empire enjoin touching the Execution of arrests and Sentences (Osiander, 2001).

Lots of scientists have declared that the global system of states, multinational corporations and organizations which exists today began in 1648 at the Peace of Westphalia. Both the grounds and the consequence of this view have been assaulted by revisionist academics and politicians alike, with revisionists perplexed the meaning of the Peace, and commentators and politicians attacking the Westphalian System of sovereign nation-states. (McGrew, Lewis, 1992)

The Westphalian System, primarily stated by the provisions of the treaties concluded in Westphalia in 1648 is used as a tag by academics to define the system of states which the world is based on of today. In 1998, a Symposium on the lifelong political significance of the Peace of Westphalia, then–NATO Secretary General Javier Solana stated that “humankind and democratic system were two standards fundamentally unrelated to the primary Westphalian organization” and charged a criticism that “the Westphalian system had its restrictions. For one, the standard of dominion it relied on also shaped the basis for rivalry, not society of states; omission, not incorporation.” (Linklater, 1975)

In 2000, then–German minister of foreign affairs Joschka Fischer submitted to the Peace of Westphalia in his Humboldt Speech, which disputed that the system of European politics set up by Westphalia was outmoded: “The center of the notion of Europe after 1945 was and still is a refusal of the European balance-of-power attitude and the hegemonic ambitions of personage states that had emerged tracking the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, a rejection which took the form of closer meshing of vital interests and the transfer of nation-state self-governing rights to supranational European foundations.” (Richmond, 2002).

In the outcome of the 11 March 2004 Madrid attacks, Lewis ‘Atiyyatullah, who asserts to symbolize the terrorist network al-Qaeda, affirmed that “the global system built-up by the West since the Treaty of Westphalia will collapse; and a new global arrangement will rise under the control of a powerful Islamic state”. It has also been maintained that globalization is bringing a development of the global system past the autonomous Westphalian state. (Richmond, 2002)

Nevertheless, European nationalists and American paleoconservatives represented by Pat Buchanan grasp a constructive view of the Westphalian state. Followers of the Westphalian state notion resist socialism and some forms of capitalism for challenging the nation state. A major argument of Buchanan’s political vocation, for instance, has been attacking globalization, critical theory, neo-conservatism, and other ideas he regards as disadvantageous to today’s developed states.

Since the late 1990s, the notion of Westphalian independence has been brought into additional matter by a range of definite and projected military interferences in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Sudan among others. (Richmond, 2002)

Few of these, taking into account the interventions in Yugoslavia have been rationalized as concerned interference, intended at avoiding approaching genocide or large-scale loss of life. Neo-conservatism particularly has enhanced this line of judging further, to assert that a lack of democracy may prefigure future humanitarian disasters, or that democracy declares a human right on its own.

There is, however, debate about whether recent violations of state independence, such as the 2003 Iraq War, really reproduced these higher standards, or whether the real explanation was simply that of self-defense, which is more dependable with the conventional view of Westphalian dominion. A new notion of dependent independence seems to be promising in worldwide law, but it has not yet achieved the point of legal legality. (Richmond, 2002)

The supplementary denigration of Westphalian sovereignty happens in relation to supposedly failed states, of which Afghanistan (before the invasion of NATO forces in 2001) is often regarded as an example. In this case, it is debated that no dominion exists and that worldwide interference is justified on compassionate positions and by the hazards posed by failed states to neighboring states and the world in general. Nevertheless, the 2001 incursion was validated more honestly on the bases of self-defense, as a reaction to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US. Some of the current argues over Somalia is also being radiated in these same terms (Richmond, 2002).

The main precious fact for the theorists of international relations, that the Peace of Westphalia is of, is that it stated the first formal paradigm of international relations in the world. It is the balance of power. The brief explanation of this concept states, that peace is maintained while all the actors of the international arena are equally powerful (or equally weak). The fact is, this concept is rather dangerous for peace in the long-term perspective. Any balance tends to be violated or interrupted. When one becomes more powerful in comparison with the others, he tries to turn this disparity into his own profit. Thus, taking into account the ambitions of medieval kings and emperors, the peace could not be maintained for a long time, and this tendency outlined in the following capturing wars among European states (Grimes, 1956).

Within a balance of power system, a state may choose to engage in either balancing or bandwagoning behavior. In a time of war, the decision to balance or to bandwagon may well determine the survival of the state. The fact is the rules for boundaries and independence elated only European states, and in no way touched the colonies. Thus, the place for the colonial wars was left. It became the first historical lesson on the division of the world, which stated, that the power and authority must be applied only within the borders of particular state.

Autonomy, declared by the provisions of the treaties concluded in Westphalia, means that no exterior actor applies power within the boundaries of the state. Territorial abuses of the Westphalian model engage the formation of power arrangements that are not coterminous with physical boundaries. Examples comprise the British Commonwealth (but not colonial empires in which power and territory are coterminous, even if territories of land are not neighboring), the European Union, Antarctica, Andorra, and the Exclusive Economic Zone for the oceans. Some trustworthy acts within a particular area are determined by actors within that area, but others are decided by extra-territorial bodies, such as the European Court. Most of these attempts to create power arrangements that surpass territory have failed, but that has not discouraged governors from formulating new institutional forms: the Westphalian model has not limited the imagination (Grimes, A.P., 1956).

Infringements of the standard of independence, in which an exterior actor is able to implement some trustworthy arrangement within the territory of a state, have been more recurrent than those of territoriality, but not always as realizable. The most modest way in which independence can be conciliated is if some external actor alters conceptions of legitimate action that are held by groups within a given polity. Autonomy can also be transgressed if rulers agree to authority structures that are managed by external actors, or if more influential actors impose foundations, policies, or staff on weaker states. Examples of disobediences of independence include the pressure of the Catholic Church on advances about the legality of birth control and abortion.

Compromises of Westphalia have occurred in four ways-through principles, contracting, coercion, and imposition. These four modalities are differentiated by whether the actions of one actor depend on that of another and by whether at least one of the actors is better off and none worse off. In meetings, rulers enter into concords, such as human rights agreements, from which they expect some gain, but their actions are not dependent on what others do. In constricting, rulers agree to break Westphalian standards, but only if they are offered some benefit, such as a overseas loan. In compulsion, the monarchs of more powerful states make weaker ones worse off by engaging in realistic threats to which the aim might or might not comply. In obligation, the objective is so weak that it has no alternative but to comply with the preferences of the stronger. Conferences, agreements, compulsion, and annoyance have all been permanent prototypes of actions in the international system, and thus lots of states have not kowtowed to the Westphalian model. (Krasner, 1995) Every major peace treaty since 1648- Westphalia, Utrecht, Vienna, Versailles, and Helsinki-has infringed the Westphalian model in one way or another. It happened so, because of the inconsistency of this model, and the principles itself can not be stated. Mechanism of the observation, and punishment for the violation should be declared. Compromising the Westphalian model is always available as a policy option as there is no influence configuration to prevent it: nothing can prevent rulers from misbehaving against the household autonomy of other states or making authority systems that surpass territory. In the international system, institutions are less constraining and more fluid, more subject to challenge and change than in more settled circumstances. The mechanisms for locking in particular institutional forms, such as socialization, positive reinforcement between structures and agents, or path-dependent processes, are weaker at the international level than in well-established domestic polities. This is even true for the Westphalian state which is taken to be the core institutional form of the modern international system. In international politics, nothing is ever off the table. Rather than being regarded as an empirical regularity in which territoriality and autonomy are accurate descriptions of most if not all states, or as an analytic assumption that regards central decision-makers as capable of independently formulating policies subject only to constraints imposed by the international system, the Westphalian model is better conceptualized as a convention or reference point that might or might not determine the behavior of policymakers who are also motivated by material interests, security and national ideals, and whose ability to influence outcomes depends upon their power. All states are not the same. Some have closely approximated the Westphalian model. Others have not. Some non-Westphalian forms of political organization, such as empires, tribes, and trading leagues, have disappeared, but at the same time the principles of Westphalia are frequently ignored. The following section of this article traces some of the confusion about the nature of sovereignty to the fact that the term has been used in several different ways. Then the mechanisms through which the principles of territoriality and autonomy have been violated-inventions, contracting, coercion, and imposition-are explicated. This is followed by a discussion of why the Westphalian model has both persisted and been frequently violated. In the conclusion, I argue that it would be constructive to recognize how fragile the Westphalian model has been, not only because violations of the principles of territoriality and autonomy will take place in any event, but also because compromising Westphalia is sometimes the best way to achieve peace and stability (Krasner, 1995).

Most researchers note that the idea of democratic peace, primarily stated in the provisions of Westphalian Peace, is the most perspective paradigm for the long-term perspective. The principles of democratic peace, declared in the treaties stay the most sufficient rules of diplomacy and international relations, but XX century showed that alongside with democracies, formal and non-liberal democracies appeared. All the conclusions and decisions of the heads of states are based on the provisions of eternity and non-changeability of the main principles of intergovernmental relations – the striving of the states to enlarging of the power in the conditions of unsafe world, inevitability of rivalry, and necessity of the observation of the principle of the balance of power between / among Superpowers. The sate of peace is not so the result of democratic culture, or the system of checks and balances, as the result of the existence of powerful international unions and common potential of containment of potential aggressors (Brown, 2001).

Another argument against TDP (Theory of Democratic Peace), that opponents give, is that during cold war, in order to prevent the spread of communism, the USA embargoed leftists legitimate states by the policy of arm-twisting, and helping totalitarian right governments come to power (Brown, 2001).

Thus, the Peace of Westphalia appeared rather innovative treaty for that period, and stated the character of the relations among sates, which was innovative itself. The articles of the treaties stated the principles of interstate relations and cooperation, which are still actual, and are applied by the institutions and politics. Another point is that, the TDP takes its origin in the treaties of the Peace of Westphalia, but this theory has its opponents, and is considered to be imperfect.

• Brown. C., 2001. Understanding International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan; 2Rev Ed edition
• Ceadel, M. 1996 The Origins of War Prevention: The British Peace Movement and International Relations, 1730-1854 . Oxford: Oxford University
• Doyle, Michael W. 1983 Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 3.
• Dunne, Tim. (2005): Liberalism The Globalisation of World Politics. Oxford University Press, 2 nd edn, 2001
• Gross, L. 1948. The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948. The American Journal of International Law , Vol. 42, No. 1.
• Grimes, A.P., 1956. The Pragmatic Course of Liberalism. The Western Political Quarterly , Vol. 9, No. 3.
• Haskins, C. H, Robert, H. L., 1920 Some Problems of the Peace Conference. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Krasner, Stephen D. 1995 Compromising Westphalia International Security, Vol. 20, No. 3.
• McGrew, A.G, Lewis, P., 1992. Global Politics: Globalization and the Nation-State. Polity publishers.
• Osiander, A. 2001. Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. International Organization , Vol. 55, No. 2.
• Panke, D., Risse, T. 2006 Classical Liberalism in IR” in “International Relations Theory , edited by Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 89-108.
• Richmond, O. P. 2002 Maintaining Order, Making Peace . New York: Palgrave.
• Schmitt, C. 2007 The concept of the political . University of Chicago press.
• Schweller, Randall L. 1992 Domestic Structure and Preventive War: Are Democracies More Pacific? World Politics, Vol. 44, No. 2.
• Linklater, A 1975. Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era. Polity Press publishing.
• The Thirty Years’ War was fought mainly on the territory of Germany, and involved most of European continental powers. Although it was a religious conflict between Protestants and Catholics, the rivalry between the Habsburg dynasty and other powers was a more central motive , as shown by the fact that Catholic France under the de facto rule of Cardinal Richelieu supported the Protestant side in order to weaken the Habsburgs.
• The Treaty of Ryswick was signed on 20 September 1697 and named after Ryswick (also known as Rijswijk) in the Dutch Republic. The treaty settled the War of the Grand Alliance, which pitted France against the Grand Alliance of England, Spain, the Holy Roman Empire and the United Provinces.
• Contours of a Failed State and Ameliorative Measures
• Religion and Diplomacy During the Crusades
• Neorealists and Marxists in International Politics
• The "Dark Ages" of Rome and Following Fall
• The Middle Ages in France
• France in the 18th Century
• The Treaty of Paris in 1763 and Influential Figures of That Period
• France of the 17th Century and the Figure of Louis XIV
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, September 22). Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations. https://ivypanda.com/essays/peace-of-westphalia-basis-of-international-relations/

"Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations." IvyPanda , 22 Sept. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/peace-of-westphalia-basis-of-international-relations/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations'. 22 September.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations." September 22, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/peace-of-westphalia-basis-of-international-relations/.

1. IvyPanda . "Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations." September 22, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/peace-of-westphalia-basis-of-international-relations/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Peace of Westphalia: Basis of International Relations." September 22, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/peace-of-westphalia-basis-of-international-relations/.

How ‘Westphalian’ is the Westphalian Model?

How ‘Westphalian’ is the Westphalian Model – and Does it Matter?

Consisting of two bilateral treaties signed in 1648, the Peace of Westphalia was agreed upon in order to bring an end to the carnage of the Thirty Years War. Significantly, the Peace has customarily been portrayed by international relations scholars, and has consequently been generally accepted by international relations students, as the origin of what has come to be known as the Westphalian model, “a society of states based on the principle of territorial sovereignty” (Evans and Newnham, 1990: 501), which entails the corollary principles of legal equality and autonomy, as well as non-intervention in the affairs of other states (enshrined in Article 2.7 of the UN Charter). Despite this, as the revisionist scholar Osiander (2001: 251) notes, “the accepted IR narrative about Westphalia” is in fact a “myth”; the Westphalian model has little, if anything, to do with the Peace of Westphalia from which the model derives its recognised name (Stirk, 2012: 641). This essay will analyse the basis of this myth by highlighting the numerous discrepancies between the terms agreed to at Westphalia and the core tenets that constitute the Westphalian model. This essay will then proceed to highlight why the Westphalian myth emerged and how it has been perpetuated so effectively. Finally, this essay will outline why it matters that the Westphalian model is not truly ‘Westphalian,’ the impact that the Westphalian myth has had on the contemporary study of international relations, and the importance of transcending the “Westphalian straitjacket.”

The traditional portrayal of the Peace of Westphalia claims that it “made the territorial state the cornerstone of the modern state system” (Morgenthau, 1985: 294), formally acknowledging “a system of sovereign states” (Spruyt, 1994: 27), thus representing a “majestic portal which leads from the old world into the new world” (Gross, 1948: 28). Nevertheless, Osiander and other revisionist scholars have sought to emphasize that those who seek to ascribe the emergence of the concept of state sovereignty to the Peace of Westphalia do so “against the backdrop of a past that is largely imaginary” (Osiander, 2001: 252).

Firstly, it is essential to note that “nowhere do the treaties mention the word ‘sovereignty’ itself,” particularly as there is no such word in Latin, the language in which the treaties were originally written (Croxton, 1999: 577). In fact, when the French delegation did suggest insertion into the treaties of a reference to sovereignty, the offer was immediately declined (Stirk, 2012: 645-646). Whilst the treaties do make reference to the right of ‘ landeshoheit ’ or ‘territorial jurisdiction’ of states, it is crucial to bear in mind that this jurisdiction was under an external legal regime, namely the Holy Roman Empire (Osiander, 2001: 283). However, Osiander (2001: 265, 272) argues that misinterpretation of the “endless technical detail on constitutional matters” within the treaties had led international relations scholars, notably Gross (1948), to mistakenly interpret ‘ landeshoheit ’ to describe ‘territorial sovereignty,’ crucially neglecting the fact that each state’s autonomy was limited through the laws of the empire by the principle of landeshoheit . Hence, the political entities within the Holy Roman Empire were not sovereign states in the modern sense, lacking the autonomy that characterizes Westphalian sovereignty.

Hierarchy, not Westphalian sovereign equality, was the dominant motif in the international system during the seventeenth century (Stirk, 2012: 643). For example, Osiander (2001: 260) observes that the Thirty Years War was sustained by the “expansionist aggression” of the Danish, Swedish, and French crowns, who had entered into conflict in order to “aggrandize themselves,” certainly not seeking a settlement at Westphalia based on absolute sovereign equality. In addition, “at least two Swiss Cantons retained reference to the Holy Roman Empire in their oath of citizenship” for several decades after the Peace of Westphalia (Osiander, 2001: 267), and even after 1648, the estates of the Holy Roman Empire continued to recognize the emperor as “their actual overlord,” continuing to send representatives to the Imperial Diet and paying common taxes (Croxton, 1999: 574). Such examples clearly reflect the hierarchical nature of seventeenth century international society, with the hierarchy of empire persisting until 1806, importantly undermining any impression of emerging Westphalian state-sovereignty as a result of the Peace of Westphalia.

Osiander (2001), Croxton (1999), and Stirk (2012) also dispute the standard assertion that the Peace of Westphalia first granted state sovereignty through the right of states to form alliances with foreign actors. In fact, the estates of Europe had always had the right to conclude treaties and alliances with foreign actors (Osiander, 2001: 273); Palatinate and Brandenburg had “struck alliances with the United Provinces in 1604 and 1605 respectively” (Beaulac, 2000: 168). The treaties that constituted the Peace of Westphalia merely recognized a practice which had already been underway for almost half a century (Beaulac, 2000: 168). Consequently, “the peace itself was restorative not innovative in the eyes of its creators” (Stirk, 2012: 646) in reasserting the pre-existing rights of states, far from the “majestic portal” to which Gross (1948: 28) had erroneously likened the Peace of Westphalia.

Rather than establishing Westphalian sovereignty, the treaties actually included a number of provisions that violated the Westphalian model (Krasner, 1995: 141), through the restriction of each ruler’s domestic authority by an external actor (the Emperor). Firstly, the treaties restricted the rights of princes to do as they like with their citizens: they “deprived the princes and free cities of the empire the power to determine the religious affiliation of their lands” (Osiander, 2001: 272). Article 5.28 of the Treaty of Osnabrück states that anyone who “shall profess and embrace a Religion different from that of the Lord of the Territory, shall in consequence of the said Peace be patiently suffer’d and tolerated, without any Hindrance or Impediment,” essentially making religious liberty a matter of international – not domestic – responsibility (Croxton, 1999: 575). Another key restriction on sovereignty imposed by the Peace of Westphalia concerns the continuing importance of the Emperor where the right of making alliances is concerned:

The individual states shall have the eternal and free right to make alliances among themselves or with foreigners…yet only…where they preserve in all ways the oath by which all are bound to the emperor and empire (Article 8.2, Treaty of Osnabrück, 1648).

Since Westphalian sovereignty is “violated when external actors influence or determine domestic authority structures,” such restrictions are inconsistent with the traditional concept of Westphalian sovereignty (Krasner, 1999: 20).

As has been highlighted above, the Westphalian model can hardly be portrayed as ‘Westphalian’; the Westphalian model has little, if anything, to do with the Peace of Westphalia from which the model derives its recognized name (Stirk, 2012: 641). In light of this, it is essential to understand why the Westphalian ‘myth’ emerged in the first place. Misinterpretation of the treaties certainly has a part to play, but according to Osiander (2001: 251), the Westphalian myth emerged and has been perpetuated principally because it allowed for a convenient and simplistic account of how the system of European states emerged. Significantly, this neglects the fact that the emergence of sovereign states within Europe was gradual and did not result spontaneously from any revolutionary breakthrough resulting from the Peace of Westphalia. Ultimately, “Westphalia…is really a product of the (narrow) nineteenth and twentieth century fixation on the concept of sovereignty” (Osiander, 2001:251), with scholars such as Leo Gross (1948) further perpetuating the Westphalian myth. By having their minds on contemporary order building developments and the post WW2 “quest to translate the United Nations Charter into a meaningful part of the international order” (Clark, 2005: 56), scholars of these types ascribe the emergence of the Westphalian model to the Peace of Westphalia.

Moving to the question of whether it matters that the Westphalian model is not ‘Westphalian,’ the short answer is a resounding yes. Beaulac (2004: 186) argues:

the myth of Westphalia has carried extraordinary power within the shared consciousness of society, and continues to impact discourses on contemporary issues on the international plane.

As a highly compelling social construct, the myth has “managed its way into the fabric of our international legal order,” as the model for the idea of state sovereignty in contemporary international law (Beaulac, 2004: 212). Crucially, the linkage between the Peace of Westphalia and the Westphalian model is not only “bad history” (as this essay illustrates above) but is also a “hindrance to the contemporary study of international relations” (Stirk, 2012: 644). This is due to the fact that “the standard account of sovereign equality and Westphalia sets up a norm that fails to account for the actual behaviour of states” (Stirk, 2012: 660), as violations of the Westphalian model have been an enduring and recurrent characteristic of international relations (Krasner, 1995: 147). The Westphalian model seems unable to explain ‘deviant’ patterns such as the Holy Roman Empire itself (Osiander, 2001: 280), or even the sovereign inequality institutionalised through the permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council to this day. Controversially, this could suggest that Westphalian sovereignty has never actually been intact, instead being best understood as an example of “organised hypocrisy” (Krasner, 1999: 5), a long-standing norm which is frequently violated. Hence, ‘compromising’ (looking beyond) Westphalia, as Krasner (1995: 115) puts it, is essential in order to gain a valid and more imaginative insight into political structures that deviate from the Westphalian model. This is a necessity given the processes of globalization and growing interdependence which continue to challenge established concepts of Westphalian sovereignty.

In conclusion, the Westphalian model can scarcely be seen as ‘Westphalian.’ Seventeenth century Europe was hierarchic, with any notion of sovereign equality explicitly rejected at the Peace of Westphalia. If anything, the Peace of Westphalia included provisions that restricted the sovereignty of the states of Europe, particularly regarding freedom or religion and the right to form alliances with foreign actors. The Westphalian myth which links the emergence of the Westphalian model to the Peace of Westphalia is based largely on the nineteenth and twentieth century fixation on the concept of state sovereignty (Osiander, 2001: 251), as well as misinterpretation of the technical detail of the treaties of the Peace of Westphalia. It is also of vital importance to note that the mythical linkage between the Peace of Westphalia and the emergence of a system of sovereign states is not only historically incorrect, but also a hindrance to a more imaginative and accurate understanding of political structures within international relations, that often deviate from the Westphalian model, both in the seventeenth century and to this day.

Beaulac, S. (2000) ‘The Westphalian Legal Orthodoxy- Myth or Reality?’ in Review of International Studies, Vol. 2: 2

Beaulac, S. (2004) ‘The Westphalian Model in Defining International Law: Challenging the Myth’ in Australian Journal of Legal History, Vol. 8: 2

Brown, C. (2002) Sovereignty, Rights and Justice: International Political Theory Today , Cambridge: Polity Press

Clark, I. (2005) Legitimacy in International Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Croxton, D. (1999) ‘The Peace of Westphalia of 1648 and the Origins of Sovereignty’ in International History Review , Vol. 21: 3

Evans, G. & Newnham, J. (1990) The Dictionary of World Politics: A Reference Guide to Concepts, Ideas and Institutions , Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf

Gross, L. (1948) ‘The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948’ in American Journal of International Law , Vol. 42: 1

Helfferich, T. (ed.) (2009) ‘The Treaty of Osnabrück’ (1648) & ‘The Treaty of Münster’ (1648) in The Thirty Years War: A Documentary History , Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing

Krasner, S.D. (1995) ‘Compromising Westphalia’ in International Security , Vol. 20: 3

Krasner, S.D. (1999) Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy , Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press

Morgenthau, H. (1985) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace , New York: McGraw-Hill

Osiander, A. (2001) ‘Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth’ in International Organization , Vol. 55: 2

Spruyt, H. (1994) The Sovereign State and Its Competitors , Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press

Stirk, P. (2012) ‘The Westphalian Model and Sovereign Equality’ in Review of International Studies , Vol. 38: 3

— Written by: Camille Mulcaire Written at: Durham University Written for: Peter Stirk Date written: January 2013

Further Reading on E-International Relations

• How Global is Security Studies? The Possibility of “Non-Western” Theory
• How Important is Neutrality in Providing Humanitarian Assistance?
• How Effective is Terrorism in Exerting Political Influence: The Case of Hamas?
• How Helpful is ‘Effective Altruism’ as an Approach to Increasing Global Justice?
• ‘Almost Perfect’: The Bureaucratic Politics Model and U.S. Foreign Policy
• How Effective Is the SCO as a Tool for Chinese Foreign Policy?

Please Consider Donating

Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.

E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!

Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.

Origins and Escalation: the Genesis of the Thirty Years’ War in Central Europe

This essay about the Thirty Years’ War provides a comprehensive overview of its origins, escalation, and eventual resolution through the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. It explores the religious, political, and territorial tensions that fueled the conflict, highlighting the complex web of alliances and rivalries that emerged. The essay underscores the devastating impact of the war on Central Europe, while also acknowledging its lasting legacy in shaping the modern state system and emphasizing the importance of dialogue and cooperation in preventing future conflicts.

How it works

In the annals of European history, few conflicts stand as testament to the complexity of religious, political, and territorial tensions as the Thirty Years’ War. Spanning from 1618 to 1648, this protracted struggle ravaged Central Europe, leaving death, destruction, and profound social upheaval in its wake. To understand the genesis and escalation of this conflict, one must delve into the intricate web of factors that precipitated its outbreak and sustained its ferocity for three decades.

The origins of the Thirty Years’ War can be traced back to the religious and geopolitical fault lines that divided Europe in the early 17th century.

At the heart of the conflict lay the deep-seated religious animosities between Catholics and Protestants, exacerbated by the Protestant Reformation of the previous century. The Peace of Augsburg in 1555 had attempted to establish a fragile peace by granting rulers the right to determine the religion of their territories, but it proved insufficient to quell religious tensions.

The spark that ignited the powder keg came in 1618, with the Defenestration of Prague. This dramatic event, in which Catholic officials were thrown from a window of Prague Castle by Protestant nobles, marked the beginning of open hostilities between Catholic and Protestant factions in the Holy Roman Empire. The Bohemian Revolt that followed saw the Bohemian Estates reject the authority of the Catholic Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand II, leading to his decisive victory at the Battle of White Mountain in 1620.

Ferdinand’s subsequent efforts to impose Catholicism on his Protestant subjects in Bohemia further inflamed tensions throughout the Empire. Protestant rulers, alarmed by the prospect of Habsburg hegemony and the erosion of their religious freedoms, formed the Protestant Union in 1608 to defend their interests. In response, Catholic princes rallied under the banner of the Catholic League, setting the stage for a broader conflict that transcended mere religious differences.

The Thirty Years’ War soon evolved into a complex web of alliances and rivalries, fueled by dynastic ambitions, territorial disputes, and foreign intervention. The conflict drew in major European powers, including Spain, France, Sweden, and Denmark-Norway, each pursuing their own strategic interests on the Continent. Spain, under the Habsburg monarchy, sought to maintain Catholic dominance and extend its influence, while France, ruled by the Catholic Bourbon dynasty, saw an opportunity to weaken its Habsburg rivals.

The war’s escalation was marked by a series of military campaigns, sieges, and battles that ravaged Central Europe and exacted a heavy toll on its inhabitants. The brutality of the conflict was epitomized by atrocities committed by both sides, including pillaging, massacres, and the widespread devastation of towns and countryside. The horrors of war were compounded by famine, disease, and economic collapse, leading to untold suffering among civilian populations.

Despite the signing of numerous peace treaties and truces throughout the conflict, the Thirty Years’ War dragged on as new actors entered the fray and old grievances remained unresolved. The intervention of external powers, such as Sweden under King Gustavus Adolphus and France under Cardinal Richelieu, further prolonged the war and shifted its dynamics. The tide began to turn against the Habsburgs following their defeat at the Battle of Breitenfeld in 1631, as Swedish and French forces gained the upper hand.

The war’s denouement came with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, a series of treaties that not only brought an end to the Thirty Years’ War but also reshaped the political landscape of Europe. The Peace of Westphalia established the principle of cuius regio, eius religio (“whose realm, his religion”), reaffirming the right of rulers to determine the religion of their territories. It also recognized the independence of Switzerland and the United Provinces (modern-day Netherlands) from the Holy Roman Empire, marking the decline of imperial authority.

The legacy of the Thirty Years’ War is profound and far-reaching, shaping the course of European history for centuries to come. It laid bare the destructive potential of religious intolerance, nationalism, and great power rivalry, leaving scars that would linger long after the cannons fell silent. Yet, amidst the devastation and despair, the war also gave rise to new ideas of sovereignty, diplomacy, and international law, laying the groundwork for the modern state system.

In the end, the Thirty Years’ War stands as a cautionary tale of the human cost of fanaticism, ambition, and geopolitical machinations. It serves as a reminder of the fragility of peace and the imperative of dialogue, cooperation, and compromise in resolving conflicts that threaten the fabric of society. As Europe emerged from the ashes of war, it embarked on a path towards greater stability and prosperity, tempered by the lessons learned from the bloodiest chapter in its history.

Cite this page

Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe. (2024, Jun 01). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/

"Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe." PapersOwl.com , 1 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/ [Accessed: 4 Jun. 2024]

"Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe." PapersOwl.com, Jun 01, 2024. Accessed June 4, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/

"Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe," PapersOwl.com , 01-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/. [Accessed: 4-Jun-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Origins and Escalation: The Genesis of the Thirty Years' War in Central Europe . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/origins-and-escalation-the-genesis-of-the-thirty-years-war-in-central-europe/ [Accessed: 4-Jun-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous
• Next chapter >

7 Westphalia – A Paradigm? A Dialogue Between Law, Art, and the Philosophy of Science

• Published: December 2011
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

To many authors, the Westphalia Peace Treaties, negotiated in the aftermath of the Thirty Years' War (1618–48), were the first solemn statements of juridical equality between states, representing the genesis of modern international society, which established a system of states. At the same time, it was “the plain affirmation of the statement of absolute independence of the different state orders.” These documents serve as the “birth certificate” of the modern, sovereign nation-state, the base of the present democratic state, and the founding moment of the international political system. This chapter focuses on the consequences of the Westphalia Peace Treaties for constitutional law.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• Google Scholar Indexing
• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — International Law — Role of the Peace of Westphalia in Modern Day International Relations and International Law

Role of The Peace of Westphalia in Modern Day International Relations and International Law

• Categories: International Law International Relations

About this sample

Words: 471 |

Published: Mar 14, 2019

Words: 471 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Law, Crime & Punishment Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1148 words

7 pages / 2974 words

1 pages / 820 words

1 pages / 871 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

The concept of Sameness, introduced in the book The Giver by Lois Lowry, has sparked a lot of debate among readers, educators, and scholars alike. Some argue that removing individuality, emotions, and pain from society creates a [...]

Appeasement is a term that has been much debated in the context of international relations and diplomacy. It refers to the policy of making concessions to an aggressor in order to avoid conflict. This strategy has been the [...]

Positivist thinkers has famously challenged the proposition that international law is actually law. John Austin questioned how international law could be regarded as law without a sovereign, and H.L.A. Hart claimed that [...]

Denmark, Netherlands, and Germany are positioned adjacently to the North Sea. Denmark and Netherlands, as members of the Geneva Convention of 1958, had adopted the equidistance principle to draw partial boundary lines. With the [...]

This research will this study did not look in detail at justice subdimensions. In a recent article, Scott et al. (2009) argued that the organizational justice dimensions would differ for employees based on their managerial [...]

"You see, like you, I suffer from the fantastic and so I love the realism of earth. Here, with you, everything is circumscribed, here all is formulated and geometrical, while we have nothing but indeterminate [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Advertisement

More from the Review

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Best of The New York Review, plus books, events, and other items of interest

June 20, 2024

Current Issue

The Tower and the Sewer

June 20, 2024 issue

Charlie Riedel/AP Images

Students leaving Mass at Benedictine College, Atchison, Kansas, December 2023

Submit a letter:

Email us [email protected]

Why Liberalism Failed

From Fire, by Water: My Journey to the Catholic Faith

Tyranny, Inc.: How Private Power Crushed American Liberty—and What to Do About It

Common Good Constitutionalism: Recovering the Classical Legal Tradition

Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future

When you go looking for what is lost, everything is a sign.        Eudora Welty, “The Wide Net”

On an overcast morning in the late 1980s I visited the church across the way from my apartment in Paris. I was curious. The parish, St.-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet, was then the headquarters of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, a schismatic opponent of the Vatican II reforms who had just been excommunicated by Pope John Paul II. Conservative Catholics from all over the city squeezed into the church on Sundays to hear Gregorian chants and the Tridentine Mass recited in Latin—a beautiful, forbidden experience.

After the service a fair number of congregants gathered in the church’s small courtyard to chat and leaf though some of the right-wing books and newspapers that had been laid out on folding tables. When I hovered over one of them, a young man behind it mentioned a shop where I could find more in the same vein. He tore off a scrap of paper and wrote down an address, telling me that the bookstore had no sign—there had been arson attempts at earlier locations—and that I should just knock on the door.

I went, I knocked, I was given the once over, then admitted. After passing through a thick crimson drape I discovered a jumble of overstuffed bookcases lining the walls of a good-size room. Despite appearances there turned out to be order in the disorder: the collection had been laid out chronologically according to the French right’s conflicting historical obsessions.

The first bookcase was devoted to the neopaganism of the Nouvelle Droite (New Right), which since the 1960s has been inspired by the writer and editor Alain de Benoist; his On Being a Pagan (1981) is considered one of its foundational texts. This group is in a sense the most radical, if minuscule, force on the European right because it places Eden so far back in time that it blames the advent of Christianity two millennia ago for Europe’s relentless decline. The next bookcase, though, contained histories extolling Christianity’s victory over paganism and pining for the simple harmony of the monastic Middle Ages. Next to those I found lush volumes celebrating the unmonastic grandeur of the Catholic House of Bourbon. A few bookcases were then given over to the catastrophe of the Revolution, with hagiographies of the counterrevolutionary uprisings of the Chouans and the Vendeans.

Farther down the aisle were strongly anti-German books focused on the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871. After those, predictably, was a large collection of anti-Dreyfusard works, all supposedly proving that even if Alfred Dreyfus wasn’t a German agent, then at least his supporters were. Yet in the bookcase next to it I found philo-Germanic biographies of Nazi generals like Erwin Rommel and of the heroic Vichy collaborators.

Angry books on French Algeria then followed, including memoirs by officers in the Organisation Armée Secrète who resisted the French withdrawal from its colony and in retribution tried to assassinate French president Charles de Gaulle in 1962. The last bookcase contained attacks on the student rebels of May 1968, who had also wanted to oust de Gaulle, though for very different reasons. And at the end, on the floor next to the cash register, was a wire bin filled with cassettes of racist heavy metal music by bands with German names.

A moveable feast of bitter herbs.

It has always been more difficult to make sense of the radical right than the radical left. Back when there were serious left-wing bookstores catering to active socialists rather than leisured graduate students, those, too, were a little helter-skelter. Utopian authors rubbed shoulders with Stalinists, anarchists with Trotskyists, interpreters of the wisdom of Chairman Mao with interpreters of the wisdom of the Albanian leader Enver Hoxha (a Seventies thing). Shelves were devoted to each and every postcolonial liberation movement then active, with many manifestos written by obscure revolutionaries destined to become infamous tyrants. Yet despite the intellectual and geographical variety, one always had the sense that the authors imagined they were aiming at the same abstract goal: a future of human emancipation into a state of freedom and equality.

But what ultimate goal do those on the radical right share? That’s harder to discern, since when addressing the present they almost always speak in the past tense. Contemporary life is compared to a half-imagined lost world that inspires and limits reflection about possible futures. Since there are many pasts that could conceivably provoke a militant nostalgia, one might think that the political right would therefore be hopelessly fractious. This turns out not to be true. It is possible to attend right-wing conferences whose speakers include national conservatives enamored of the Peace of Westphalia, secular populists enamored of Andrew Jackson, Protestant evangelicals enamored of the Wailing Wall, paleo-Catholics enamored of the fifth-century Church, gun lovers enamored of the nineteenth-century Wild West, hawks enamored of the twentieth-century cold war, isolationists enamored of the 1940s America First Committee, and acned young men waving around thick manifestos by a preposterous figure known as the Bronze Age Pervert. And they all get along.

The reason, I think, is that these usable pasts serve more as symbolic hieroglyphs for the right than as actual models for orienting action. That is why they go in and out of fashion unpredictably, depending on changes in the political and intellectual climate. The most that can be said is that the further to the right one goes, the greater the conviction that a decisive historical break is to blame for the loathsome present, and that accelerating decline must be met with…well, something. That’s when things get vague.

Rhetorical vagueness is a powerful political weapon, as past revolutionaries have understood. Jesus once likened the Kingdom of God to “leaven which a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.” Not terribly enlightening, but not terribly contentious either. Marx and Engels once spoke of a postrevolutionary communist society where one could hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, and write angry manifestos at night. After that they let the matter drop. Maintaining vagueness about the future is what now allows those on the American right with very different views of the past to share an illusory sense of common purpose for the future.

How, then, is one to understand the radical right today? Prior to the election of Donald Trump, the instinctive response of American liberals and progressives was simply not to try. Journalists who embedded themselves in far-right groups, or scholars who engaged seriously with their ideas, were often greeted with suspicion as agents provocateurs (as I can attest). That has changed. Today journalists cover many of the important groups and movements, and do a fairly good job of plumbing the lower depths of right-wing Internet chatter. Anyone who wants to know what is being said in these obscure circles, in the US and around the world, can now find out.

But keeping up with trends is not the same as understanding what they signify. What so often seems lacking in our reporting is alertness to the psychodynamics of ideological commitment. The great political novelists of the past—Dostoevsky, Conrad, Thomas Mann—created protagonists who make coherent ideological arguments that other characters engage with seriously but that also reveal something significant about their psychological makeup. (A classic example is the intellectual jousting of Lodovico Settembrini and Leo Naphta in The Magic Mountain .) These authors wrote the way good psychoanalysts practice their art in the consulting room. Analysts do not dismiss the reasons we give for what we feel and believe, which might contain a good deal of truth. They are not just waiting for the gotcha moment when our “real”—that is, base—motives appear and our stated reasons can be dismissed (a common excuse for not paying attention to the right). They look at us through two different lenses: as inquiring creatures who sometimes find the truth, and as self-deceiving creatures whose searches are willfully incomplete, revealingly repetitive, emotionally charged, and often self-undermining. That is the skill required to begin understanding the leading ideological movements of our time, especially those on the right.

To my mind, the most psychologically interesting stream of American right-wing thought today is Catholic postliberalism, sometimes called “common-good conservatism.” The “post” in “postliberalism” means a rejection of the intellectual foundations of modern liberal individualism. The focus is not on a narrow set of political principles, such as rights. It is on an all-encompassing modern outlook that postliberals say prizes autonomy above all else and that is seemingly indifferent to the psychological and social effects of radical individualism. Such an outlook is not only hostile to the notion of natural or socially imposed moral limits to individual action, which are also necessary for human happiness. It has also gradually undermined the preliberal intellectual foundations of Western societies that once made it easier to protect the common good against the claims of selfish individuals. The Catholic postliberals would like to establish (or reestablish) a more communitarian vision of the good society, one in which democratic institutions would in some sense be subordinate to a superior, authoritative moral vision of the human good—which for many of them means the authority of the Catholic Church.

In the past decade interest in Catholic ideas and practice has been growing among right-leaning intellectual elites, and it is not unusual to meet young conservatives at Ivy League institutions who have converted or renewed their faith since coming to college. These students often gather at new off-campus study centers funded by conservative foundations and Catholic donors, where they invite speakers and read classic works together. While not sharing their faith, I have had students such as these and I like them. Most are searching earnestly for meaning and direction, and at these centers they have found intellectual companionship. They remind me somewhat of American students in the early 1960s who wanted to escape the air-conditioned nightmare they felt trapped in and turned for spiritual nourishment to important religious authors of the time like Thomas Merton and Paul Tillich—a forgotten chapter in the canonical history of the Sixties.

Like them, the students I meet feel the hollowness of contemporary culture, which is now heightened by the ephemeral yet fraught online relationships they have with others. So one can understand their romantic infatuation with the notion of Catholic tradition and its intellectual heritage, which promise structure and spiritual depth. (Something similar is happening to Jewish students drawn to the Modern Orthodox movement.) It’s also easy to see how they could be attracted to postliberals on the right, who claim to reveal that the source of their despair is not human existence itself—as Merton and Tillich thought—but rather the “liberal project of modernity.” This makes them highly susceptible to dreams of returning to premodern Christian social teachings that would undergird a more decent and just society, and more meaningful personal lives for themselves. This is a vain but not contemptible hope.

The book that first crystallized the postliberal mood was Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed , which created a great stir when it was published in 2018 and received an endorsement from Barack Obama. The description of postliberal thinking I offer above is largely drawn from this book. Deneen focused in particular on how the idealization of autonomy has worked as an acid eating away at the deepest cultural foundations inherited from the Christian era, which he believes supported shared customs and beliefs that cultivated stable families, a sense of obligation, and virtues like moderation, modesty, and charity. Ross Douthat summed up his argument well:

Where it once delivered equality, liberalism now offers plutocracy; instead of liberty, appetitiveness regulated by a surveillance state; instead of true intellectual and religious freedom, growing conformity and mediocrity. It has reduced rich cultures to consumer products, smashed social and familial relations, and left us all the isolated and mutually suspicious inhabitants of an “anticulture” from which many genuine human goods have fled. 1

How persuasive you find this description will depend on whether you share Deneen’s bleak view of the way we live now. 2 Most on the postliberal right do. But they also bring into the picture concerns that typically animate the left, such as the political influence of capital, the privileges of an inbred, meritocratic elite, the devastation of the environment, and the dehumanizing effects of endless technological innovation—all of which Deneen interpreted as the fruits of liberal individualism. The postliberals see themselves as developing a more comprehensive view of the common good that integrates culture, morality, politics, and economics, which would make conservatism more consistent with itself by freeing it from Reaganite idolatry of individual property rights and the market.

Though Deneen is Catholic and teaches at Notre Dame, Why Liberalism Failed is not an explicitly Catholic book. To understand how distaste for the liberal present could make Catholicism psychologically appealing, it helps to read Sohrab Ahmari’s political-spiritual memoir, From Fire, by Water . Ahmari, a friend and ally of Deneen’s, was born a Muslim in Iran in 1985 and was brought to the United States by his educated parents at the age of thirteen. In his telling, he almost immediately came to disdain the “liberal sentimental ecumenism” in which he was being raised. He then became a serial converter, a type familiar to ministers. He was first an enthusiastic teen atheist, then an enthusiastic Nietzschean, then an enthusiastic Trotskyist, then an enthusiastic postmodernist, and finally a very enthusiastic neoconservative. (That’s a lot of bookshelves.) It was about this time that his writings came to the attention of The Wall Street Journal , and he was soon working on its editorial-page staff.

Ahmari now sees his political flitting about as an unconscious search to fill a spiritual void. As generally happens in conversion stories, an epiphany arrives and things begin to change. Suffering from a drinking problem and very hungover, he wandered one day in 2008 into a Manhattan church where Mass was being celebrated. As the bells rang out for the Adoration of the Host, he melted: “Tears streamed from my eyes and down my face. These were tears neither of sadness nor even of happiness. They were tears of peace.” It took eight more years for him to convert officially to Catholicism, and by his own account the decision was as political as it was theological. “I longed for stable authority as well as redemption,” he writes, and the Church represented “Order. Continuity. Tradition and totality. Confidence.” If gaining that meant having to accept even the obscure doctrine of the Incarnation, so be it: “Its very improbability to my mind counted in its favor.”

Ahmari is a disarming writer. At one point in the book he asks, “Had I found in the Catholic faith a way to express the reactionary longings of my Persian soul, albeit in a Latin key?” He never answers that, though any fair reader could do it for him: Yes . But there was still one conversion to go: from neoconservatism to postliberalism.

He was initially critical of populists like Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán when they came on the scene, writing as late as 2017 that “the case for plunging into political illiberalism is weak, even on social-conservative grounds…. What commends liberalism is historical experience, not abstract theory.” 3 Within two years, though, he was preaching a different sermon directed as much against the neoconservatives as against the left. Today Ahmari presents himself as a cultural conservative who admires Orbán—the Enver Hoxha of American postliberalism—and an economic social democrat who admires Elizabeth Warren. His latest book, Tyranny, Inc. , is a scathing and fairly effective attack on neoliberal finance capitalism and Silicon Valley’s “market utopianism,” and a paean to unions, regulation, fixed-benefit pension plans, and many other good progressive things. Like Deneen, he sees left- and right-wing libertarians as evil twins spawned by a liberal overclass that must be overthrown in the name of human dignity and an ordered society that would work for the least well-off. His latest project is Compact , a lively online magazine he cofounded and edits where antiliberals of left and right—from Glenn Greenwald and Samuel Moyn to Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley—display their wares.

Adrian Vermeule, a Harvard law professor specializing in constitutional and administrative law, is cut from different cloth. He, too, converted to Catholicism in the past decade, convinced that “there is no stable middle ground between Catholicism and atheist materialism.” The Virgin Mary was apparently important to his decision: “Behind and above all those who helped me along the way, there stood a great Lady.” 4

Vermeule is both more penetrating and intellectually radical than his friends Deneen and Ahmari, which gives his writings a Janus-faced quality. His academic books are learned and well argued, and have a place in contemporary constitutional debates, including Law and Leviathan: Redeeming the Administrative State (2020), which he wrote with his liberal colleague (and NYR contributor) Cass Sunstein. When writing online, though, he lets his id out the back door and it starts tearing up the garden. A little like radical Islamists who speak of peace in English but of war in Arabic, Vermeule has learned to adjust his rhetoric to his audience.

His most recent book, Common Good Constitutionalism , makes a challenging case for abandoning both progressive and originalist readings of the American Constitution and returning to what he calls the “classical vision of law.” This tradition, rooted in the works of the Roman jurists and Thomas Aquinas, took civil law to be a stable framework for pursuing the common goods of peace, justice, abundance, and solidarity for the community as a whole. Rights matter in such a system, but only derivatively as means to achieve these ends. Liberty, in Vermeule’s view, is “a bad master, but a good servant” if properly constrained and directed. These are very old ideas, but Vermeule manages to breathe new life into them in a bracing way that will surprise conventional legal liberals and conservatives. For example, in a précis of the book’s argument published in The Atlantic , he writes:

Elaborating on the common-good principle that no constitutional right to refuse vaccination exists, constitutional law will define in broad terms the authority of the state to protect the public’s health and well-being, protecting the weak from pandemics and scourges of many kinds—biological, social, and economic—even when doing so requires overriding the selfish claims of individuals to private “rights.”

This is a book worth engaging with.

Such is the mainstream Vermeule. An angrier character appears in right-leaning journals like First Things and obscure websites of the Catholic far right. There he operates according to a maxim borrowed from the Catholic reactionary tradition running from Joseph de Maistre to Carl Schmitt: “All human conflict is ultimately theological.” 5 In these writings, liberalism is not a mistaken political and legal theory, or even a mistaken way of social life. It is a “fighting, evangelistic faith” with an eschatology, a clergy, martyrs, evangelical ministers, and sacraments directed toward battling the conservative enemies of progress. 6 Their fire must be fought with fire.

Vermeule is a tired man—tired of waiting for change, tired of right-wing “quietism,” tired of merely being tolerated by the oppressive liberal order that says, “You are welcome to be a domestic extremist, so long as your extremism remains safely domesticated.” 7 (Tip of the hat to Herbert Marcuse.) He wants a radical movement against liberalism that is “interested not merely in slowing its progress, but in defeating it, undoing it.” To his mind, only a self-conscious political Catholicism that distinguishes temporal and spiritual power, but ultimately subordinates the former to the latter, can meet the historical challenge. He harbors the hope that a crisis and epiphany will provoke a revolutionary realignment:

The hunger for the real might then make people so desperate, so sick of the essential falsity of liberalism, that they become willing to gamble that the Truth…will prevail—or at least willing to gamble on entering into coalition with other sorts of anti-liberals. 8

Vermeule is a recognizable psychological type in revolutionary movements: the Accelerator. Accelerators act as scourges to their comrades, whose cowardice, they claim, is all that stands in the way of the revolution. They have historically appeared on the radical left and right as enemies of social democrats and liberal reformers who spread the illusion that amelioration through democratic institutions is possible. Accelerators see themselves as the vanguard of the vanguard and mock their allies’ refusal to “break shit,” as the Silicon Valley mantra goes. Eventually they become mirror images of their imagined ruthless enemies.

Vermeule has not quite reached that point. Instead he has adopted the short-term strategy of encouraging people on the right to make a long stealth march through the institutions of government. (Tip of the hat to Rudi Dutschke.) “It is a matter,” he writes, “of finding a strategic position from which to sear the liberal faith with hot irons, to defeat and capture the hearts and minds of liberal agents, to take over the institutions of the old order.” And the best position from which to do that is within the executive branch, where it’s sometimes possible to subvert the status quo without having to consult more directly representative institutions like Congress or state legislatures. Just as Joseph insinuated himself into the Egyptian royal court to protect the Jews, so postliberals should embed themselves in bureaucracies and start nudging policy in the right direction, presumably until an antiliberal pharaoh takes charge (again).

Vermeule floated these cloak-and-dagger ideas in a critical review of his friend Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed in 2018. In that book Deneen still hoped to redeem liberalism by shoring up the moral foundations of local communities and educating the young in the priority of the common good. Vermeule the Accelerationist called him out, saying he was entranced by the “mystification” of the liberal order. The counterrevolution is approaching; what are you afraid of?

Deneen took this challenge to heart and responds in his latest book, Regime Change , which reads like it was written by a different person. The tone of Why Liberalism Failed was one of regret, even mourning for something precious that had been lost. The new book tries to sound more radical but is so half-baked that at times it seems a parody of engagée literature, written in a kind of demotic Straussianism. Deneen echoes the old battle cry of counterrevolutionaries that “any undertaking to ‘conserve’ must first more radically overthrow the liberal ideology of progress.” The good news is that “the many”—which he also calls, without a trace of irony, “the demos ”—are achieving class consciousness, but lack the knowledge and discipline to refine their anger into a program for governing. What they need are leaders who are part of the elite but see themselves as “class traitors” ready to act as “stewards and caretakers of the common good.” He calls this “aristopopulism” and its practitioners “ aristoi .” (Garbo laughs.) It is a very old fantasy of deluded political intellectuals to become the pedagogical vanguard of a popular revolution whose leaders can be made to see a glimmer of the true light. Imagine a Notre Dame professor taking a stroll around the stoa of South Bend, Indiana, explaining to the QAnon shaman the scholastics’ distinction between ius commune and ius naturale , and you get the idea.

As far-fetched as the idea of right-wing aristoi making a long march through the institutions may seem, it is circulating at a time when Trumpian activists are using the same strategy to prepare for a battle against the “deep state” should Trump be elected again. The Heritage Foundation, for example, has contributed nearly a million dollars to Project 2025, which is amassing a database of roughly 20,000 trusted right-wingers who could be appointed to government positions immediately in a second Trump administration. The hope is not only to replace Biden’s appointees, which often requires congressional approval, but to establish a new category of civil service positions (Schedule F) that could be staffed with loyalists, which is illegal under current law. Trump had established this category late in his presidency, and the Biden administration was quick to abolish it after the 2020 election. But Republicans could quite easily restore it after a Trump victory, and seem intent on doing so. As the Heritage Foundation puts it in the statement of purpose for Project 2025:

It is not enough for conservatives to win elections. If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration. 9

This notion of social change having to come from the top is, in the Catholic tradition, a very papal one. In this sense, the postliberals writing today are papists in spirit even if they are not entirely enamored of the current pontiff. What is striking in their works is that they almost never speak about the power of the Gospel to transform a society and culture from below by first transforming the inner lives of its members. Saving souls is, after all, a retail business, not a wholesale one, and has nothing to do with jockeying for political power in a fallen world. Such ministering requires patience and charity and humility. It means meeting individual people where they are and persuading them that another, better way of living is possible. This is the kind of ministering the postliberals should be engaged in if they are serious about wanting to see Americans abandon their hollow, hedonistic individualism—not hatching plans to infiltrate the Department of Education.

Jesus implored his disciples to be “wise as serpents and harmless as doves” as they went out into the world to preach the Word. Deneen counsels postliberal moles to adopt “Machiavellian means to Aristotelian ends” in the political sphere. This is a very different gospel message and brings to mind Montaigne’s wise remark that “it is much easier to talk like Aristotle and live like Caesar than to talk and live like Socrates.” Ahmari, ever the hothead, addresses the troops in more militant language, exhorting them to

fight the culture war with the aim of defeating the enemy and enjoying the spoils in the form of a public square re-ordered to the common good and ultimately the Highest Good…. Civility and decency are secondary values…. We should seek to use [our] values to enforce our order and our orthodoxy, not pretend that they could ever be neutral. To recognize that enmity is real is its own kind of moral duty. 10

Faith may move mountains, but too slowly for these Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

Seen from a certain perspective, the postliberals do get a number of things right. There is a malaise—call it cultural, call it spiritual, call it psychological—in modern Western societies, reflected above all in the worrisome state of our children, who are ever more depressed and suicidal. And we do lack adequate political concepts and vocabulary for articulating and defending the common good and placing necessary limits on individual autonomy, from gun control to keeping Internet pornography from the young. On this many across the political spectrum could agree. What liberal or progressive today would reject Vermeule’s argument that “a just state is a state that has ample authority to protect the vulnerable from the ravages of pandemics, natural disasters, and climate change, and from the underlying structures of corporate power that contribute to these events”? 11 He, though, has a developed Catholic theory of government to explain why that is necessarily the case. Do liberals or progressives have one today? I know I don’t.

But seen from another perspective, the postliberals offer just one more example of the psychology of self-induced ideological hysteria, which begins with the identification of a genuine problem and quickly mutates into a sense of world-historical crisis and the appointment of oneself and one’s comrades as the select called to strike down the Adversary—quite literally in this case. As Vermeule puts it,

Liberalism’s deepest enmity, it seems, is ultimately reserved for the Blessed Virgin—and thus Genesis 3:15 and Revelation 12:1–9, which describe the Virgin’s implacable enemy, give us the best clue as to liberalism’s true identity. 12

He means Satan.

The postliberals are stuck in a repetition of mistakes made by many right-wing movements that get so tangled up in their own hyperbolic rhetoric and fanciful historical dramaturgy that they eventually become irrelevant. As long as their focus is on culture wars rather than spreading the Good News, these Catholics will inevitably meet with disappointment in post-Protestant secular America, where even the red-state demos demands access to pornography, abortion, and weed. The postliberals will perhaps get their own bookcase in the library of American reaction. But the rest of the American right will eventually be off in search of new symbols and hieroglyphs to dream its dreams.

My concern is for the young people drawn to the movement today. Their unhappiness with the lonely, superficial, and unstable lives our culture and economy offer them does them credit. But finding the true source of our disquiet is never a simple matter, for young or old. It’s much easier to become enchanted by historical fairy tales and join a partisan political sect promising redemption from the present than it is to reconcile oneself to never being fully reconciled with life or the historical moment, and to turn within. If I were a believer and were called to preach a sermon to them, I would tell them to continue cultivating their minds and (why not) their souls together, and to leave Washington to the Caesars of this world. And warn them that the political waters surrounding their conservative Mont-Saint-Michels are starting to smell distinctly like a sewer.

Grand Poobah of the Antigrandiose

‘I Still Would Have Had That Abortion’

Livelier Than the Living

Subscribe to our Newsletters

More by Mark Lilla

Who is the “nonpolitical” man Thomas Mann tried to defend even as he couldn’t escape politics?

May 13, 2021 issue

November 5, 2020 issue

January 17, 2019 issue

Mark Lilla is the author of The Shipwrecked Mind: On Political Reaction and Ignorance and Bliss: On Wanting Not to Know , which will be published in December. (June 2024)

“Is There Life After Liberalism?,” The New York Times , January 13, 2018.  ↩

For a critical challenge to Deneen’s view, see Robert Kuttner, “Blaming Liberalism,” The New York Review , November 21, 2019.  ↩

“The Terrible American Turn Toward Illiberalism,” Commentary , October 2017.   ↩

Madeleine Teahan, “There Is No Middle Way Between Atheism and Catholi-cism, Says Harvard Professor Who Has Converted,” Catholic Herald , October 28, 2016.   ↩

“All Human Conflict Is Ultimately Theological,” Church Life Journal , July 26, 2019.  ↩

See Adrian Vermeule’s review of Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed , “Integration from Within,” American Affairs , Vol 2., No. 1 (Spring 2018).   ↩

“Liberalism’s Good and Faithful Servants,” Compact , February 28, 2023.   ↩

“Liberalism’s Fear,” in Integralism and the Common Good , Vol. 1, edited by P. Edmund Waldstein and Peter A. Kwasniewski (Angelico, 2021), p. 313.   ↩

See Walter M. Shaub Jr., “The Corruption Playbook,” The New York Review , April 18, 2024; and Thomas B. Edsall’s thorough reporting in “Trump’s Backers Are Determined Not to Blow It This Time Around,” The New York Times , April 3, 2024.  ↩

“Against David French-ism,” firstthings.com, May 29, 2019.   ↩

“Beyond Originalism,” The Atlantic , March 31, 2020.   ↩

“A Christian Strategy,” First Things , November 2017.   ↩

Reagan and the Apocalypse

January 19, 1984 issue

Leonard Schapiro (1908–1983)

December 22, 1983 issue

Short Review

July 20, 1972 issue

Blackjack Love

December 13, 1973 issue

A Time for Jeremiah

February 18, 1988 issue

News from the Dalai Lama

August 16, 2012 issue

The Fate of the Union: Kennedy and After

December 26, 1963 issue

Notes on Prejudice

October 18, 2001 issue

Subscribe and save 50%!

Get immediate access to the current issue and over 25,000 articles from the archives, plus the NYR App.

Already a subscriber? Sign in