Crime and Punishment in International Politics: On the Agency and Moral Standing of Community

This article investigates how the concept of the international community was rhetorically constructed in public diplomatic discourse and endowed with both agential status and moral authority. It argues that this conceptual innovation emerged during a critical juncture in the 1920s–1930s, amid debates on collective security within the League of Nations. In response to acts of aggression that undermined the newly established international order, diplomats employed contested notions of “crime” and “punishment” to characterize state behavior. In the League's debates over the first international sanctions, references to extra-legal moral principles were used to bolster both the legitimacy and efficacy of the legal regime. Since the principle of sovereign equality precluded any single state from claiming moral authority, diplomats instead innovatively portrayed the international community as a fictive agent endowed with superior moral standing. This rhetorical move helped legitimize calls for punishing aggressors. Adopting a historically informed constructivist approach, the article illuminates how conceptual transformations within the normative order unfold through diplomatic practice. It shows how diplomatic forums can serve as platforms for conceptual innovation with lasting impact on public discourse on world politics.