Development of International Law in Post Modern Era affects the growth of Multiculturalism.

View With Charts And Images

Development of International Law in Post Modern Era affects the growth of Multiculturalism


International law covers almost every kind of activity of inter-state character. It is rather difficult to describe the exact scope of international law in the context of modern times when an unprecedented technological and scientific developments and concern for human rights and welfare have given rise to development of international law in various field. The subject matter of international law has correspondingly expanded, and international law now has within its ambit issues which were traditionally regarded as being exclusively within a State’s domestic jurisdiction, for example treatment of one’s own nationals. This has had repercussions for individuals. They are now recognized as possessing some, albeit limited, international personality. It is also important to realize that States need law in order to seek and attain certain goals, whether these are economic well-being, survival and security or ideological advancement. The system therefore has to be certain enough for such goals to be ascertainable, and flexible enough to permit change when this becomes necessary due to the confluence of forces demanding it.[1]

International law, however, has not just expanded horizontally to embrace the new States which have been established relatively recently; it has extended itself to include individuals, groups and international organizations within its scope. It has also moved into new fields covering such issues an international trade, problems of environmental protection and outer space exploration[2]. The international law today is immense. From the regulation of space expeditions to the question of the law division of the ocean floor, and from the protection of human of rights to the management of the international financial system, its involvement has spread out from the primary concern with the preservation of peace, to embrace all the interests of contemporary international life.[3]

The world is getting smaller because of globalization of economy and information technology. States are becoming more inter-dependent to each other. It needs hardly emphasis that peace and security in international community can only be achieved if rules of international law are strictly observed. Peace is inter-linked with economic growth and development. Therefore the need for international law is overwhelming in the world today. During the late 19th and 20th centuries international law has grown enormously both in scope and context. In earlier days international law meant laws governing only States. Like any other rules of law, international law has undergone a change to meet the needs of the day.[4]

That multiculturalism is multifaceted and complex is not simply an obstacle or handicap, it is also an asset for it reflects the many streams, past and present, that multiculturalism represents and is on the receiving end of. We need a complex, rich take on multiculturalism as a configuration of trends and a notion that is disputed and disputable. This reflection seeks to contribute to a wide-angle approach by developing kaleidoscopic and long-term views of multiculturalism.

What is International Law?

The words “International Law” were used for the first time by Jermy Bentham in 1780. Since then these words have been used to denote the body of rules and principles which regulate the relations among the members of international community. The term ‘members of international community ‘now denotes States, International organizations, individuals and certain non-State entities.[5]

The traditional definition of international law, namely a body of rules governing the relations of independent States in times of peace and war, is too rigid and outmoded. A definition of international law must accommodate the developments which the international legal system has witnessed in the twentieth century, and must reflect international law as it is today.[6]

The main purpose of international law is to ensure that states comply with rights and obligations within a framework of mutual trust and co-operation. It is imperative in modern times that in terms of international law, inter-governmental organizations may run their functions smoothly and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals are protected[7]. The primary purpose of international law is to regulate the relations between States.[8]

Definitions of International Law:

The traditional definition of international law by Oppenheim as the body of rules that are legally binding of states in relation to each other appears to be too narrow because subjects of international law are not only states but also international organizations and individuals in certain circumstances. In this context it is desirable to re-define international law as those body of rules which not only deals with States in relation to each other but also a body of rules that deal with international organizations and individuals.[9]

Prof. L. Oppenheim has defined International Law in the following words-

“The Law of Nations or International Law is the name for the body of customary and conventional rules which are considered legally binding by civilized States in their intercourse with each other.” [10]

Sir Robert Jennings and Sir Arthur Watts, have revised Oppenheim’s definition of International Law in the following words:

“International Law is the bodies of rules are legally binding on states in their intercourse with each other. These rules are primarily those which govern the relation of States, but States are not the only subjects of International Law, International Organizations, and to some extent, also individuals may subjects of rights conferred and duties imposed by international law.” Further, “not only individuals but also certain territorial or political units other than States to a limited extent, be directly the subject of rights and duties under International Law.” [11]

The definition of international law in the soviet textbook by Professor Kozhevnikov was stated as follows:

“International law can be defined as the aggregate of rules governing relations between States in the process of their conflict and co-operation, designed to safeguard their peaceful co-existence, expressing the will of the ruling classes of these States and defended in case of need by coercion applied by States individually or collectively.” [12]

Prof. Lissitzyn says,

“The very conception that international law is a ‘body of rules’ now stands charged as static and inadequate”. “Like all living law, international law does not standstill but is continuously reinterpreted and reshaped in the very process of its application by authoritative decision makers, nationally and internationally. It may be noted that it has become customary to define law as ‘body of rules’.” [13]

In S. S. Lotus case[14], International Law was defined in the following words:

“International Law governs relations between independent States. The rules of law binding upon states therefore emanate from their own free will as expressed in conventions or by usages generally accepted as expressing principles of law and established or with a view to the achievement of common aims. Restriction upon the independence of States cannot therefore be resumed.” [15]

According to Hall:

“International Law consists of certain rules of conduct which modern civilized States regard as being binding on them in their relations with one another with a force comparable in nature and degree to that binding the conscientious person to obey the laws of his country and which they also regard as being enforceable by appropriate means in case of infringement.” [16]

Private and Public International Law:

International Law can be divided into two:

· Public International Law and

· Private International Law.

Public International Law:

When rules International Law are related between States and certain other entities enjoying international personality, it is called Public International Law. For Example, the conduct of a State in relation to another State in peace and war is a matter of public international law.

Private International Law:

Private international law deals with two conflicting principles of domestic law of two or more States affecting individuals.[17]

“What is Multiculturalism?”

The term “multiculturalism” became common after Prime Minister Trudeau’s speech in October, 1971, in which he introduced a new plan for the country called, “multiculturalism within a bilingual framework”. The specific ‘multicultural’ programs that were funded and the types of conferences that were convened in the first decade after this speech did not deviate much from the earlier initiatives, which had focused on general questions of Canadian national identity and on the reduction of animosity with the Québécois. Critics of multicultural policy in the early 1980s noted that the weakest policy programmes were those that were aimed at reducing racial and ethnic discrimination, and that aside from a noisy rhetoric, the general effort by the government was minimal at best and relatively little labor or energy was expended by government agencies aside from a cursory interest in producing a few films and a couple new radio programs[18].

The Harper Collins Dictionary of Sociology (1991) gives the following dentition:

Multiculturalism – the acknowledgement and promotion of cultural pluralism as a feature of many societies (………) multiculturalism celebrates and seeks to protect cultural variety, for example, minority languages. At the same time it focuses on the often unequal relationship of minority to mainstream cultures[19].

The concept of cultural pluralism, for example, as defined in the Dalloz (1981) Lexique des sciences socials is not very far from that of multiculturalism:

‘It is a characteristic of societies in which there are cultural and social differences in relation to the unicity of the mainstream, even in the complexity, of archaic societies’. Similarly, the concept of ‘interculturalism’ which is ever present in the discussions in Quebec, or, again, that of ‘pluriculturalism’, may to some extent overlap with that of multiculturalism, even if some authors endeavour, helpfully, to specify what is specification to each.

In fact, if multiculturalism is limited to culture alone, there is the constant danger that it will either appear as a policy in the service of groups which are already well situated socially, or as a policy which is unsuited to the specifically economic and social difficulties of the groups for whom cultural recognition is not necessarily a priority, or in any event, the only priority. This is why, to be in keeping with the questions which it claims to deal with, it must be part of a wider policy, one which is both social and cultural, or itself a combination of social and cultural measures enabling, in the words of Joseph Raz:

. . . . To break the link between poverty, under-education and ethnicity. So long as certain ethnic groups are so over-whelming over-represented among poor, ill-educated, unskilled; and semiskilled workers, the possibilities of cultivating respect for their cultural identity, even the possibilities of self-respect, are greatly undermined. Otherwise, it can only appear as a discourse and a practice which at best is fragmented, disjointed and associated with the interests of the dominant groups or the peace of mind of those who confuse respect for cultures and the management of social difficulties – a self-centeredness in the service of the Academy or of Finance, to quote the advocates of a ‘critical’ multiculturalism if it does not degenerate into a protest type of radicalism or a hypercritical leftism.

Finally, the relative confusion associated with the term, which is such that numerous authors refuse to use it is due to the existence of a related and, to some extent, a competing vocabulary which in some cases appears to be almost interchangeable.

Multiculturalism by which I mean the existence of cultural identities under tension in a democratic society which they may possibly contribute to destructing – is not so much the problem, as a response to the modern production of identities with a proposal for a political and institutional procedure for dealing with them. This response has only been possible since the point at which difference ceased to be interpreted as an obstacle or a form of resistance to modernity, or as the remains of traditions which are bound sooner or later to disappear, but as one of its most important aspects, and one that is likely to increase rather than to decline. It is therefore part of the important intellectual scission which saw social and political thought diverging from evolutionist paradigms and ceasing to think of change in terms of a move to from mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity.

Definition of Postmodernism:

Postmodernism literally means ‘after the modernist movement’. While “modern“ itself refers to something “related to the present”, the movement of modernism and the following reaction of postmodernism are defined by a set of perspectives. It is used in critical theory to refer to a point of departure for works of literature, drama, architecture, cinema, and design, and in the interpretation of history, law, culture and religion in the late 20th century.[20]

Postmodernism is an aesthetic, literary, political or social philosophy, which was the basis of the attempt to describe a condition, or a state of being, or something concerned with changes to institutions and conditions as post modernity. In other words, postmodernism is the “cultural and intellectual phenomenon”, especially since the 1920s’ new movements in the arts, while post modernity focuses on social and political out workings and innovations globally, especially since the 1960s in the West.

The Compact Oxford English Dictionary refers to postmodernism as

“A style and concept in the arts characterized by distrust of theories and ideologies and by the drawing of attention to conventions”.[21]

The term postmodern is described by Merriam-Webster as meaning either

“of, relating to, or being an era after a modern one” or “of, relating to, or being any of various movements in reaction to modernism that are typically characterized by a return to traditional materials and forms (as in architecture) or by ironic self-reference and absurdity (as in literature)”, or finally “of, relating to, or being a theory that involves a radical reappraisal of modern assumptions about culture, identity, history, or language”.[22]

The American Heritage Dictionary describes the meaning of the same term as

“of or relating to art, architecture, or literature that reacts against earlier modernist principles, as by reintroducing traditional or classical elements of style or by carrying modernist styles or practices to extremes: It is so architecturally interesting all with its postmodern wooden booths and sculptural cockle.[23]

Postmodernism, a disputed term that has occupied much recent debate about contemporary culture since the early 1980s. In its simplest and least satisfactory sense it refers generally to the phase of 20th century Western culture that succeeded the reign of high modernism, thus indicating the products of the age of mass television since the middle1950s. More often, though, it is applied to a cultural condition prevailing in the advanced capitalist societies since the 1960s, characterized by a superabundance of disconnected images and styles all most noticeably in television, advertising, commercial design, and pop video.[24]

As applied to literature and other arts, the term is notoriously ambiguous, implying either that modernism has been superseded or that it has continued into a new phase. Postmodernism may be seen as a continuation of modernism’s alienated mood and disorienting techniques and at the same time as an abandonment of its determined quest for artistic coherence in a fragmented world:

“In very crude terms, where a modernist artist or writer would try to wrest a meaning from the world through myth, symbol, or formal complexity, the postmodernist greets the absurd or meaningless confusion of contemporary existence with a certain numbed or flippant indifference, favoring self consciously all depthless works of fabulation, pastiche, bricolage, or aleatory disconnection”.

Development of International Law

Historical development

The foundations of international law (or the law of nations) as it is understood today lie firmly in the development of Western culture and political organization. The growth of European notions of sovereignty and the independent nation-state required an acceptance method whereby inter-state relations could be conducted in accordance with commonly accepted standards of behaviour, and international law filed the gap.

There were many factors which led to the development of international law in 19th and 20th centuries. The relations of the State and their mutual contracts had greatly increased during the said period and many rules and principles were formulated on the basis of the practice of States and the needs and requirements of the changing times and circumstances. We will discuss them under the following heading:-

Congress of Vienna, 1815:-

The Congress of Vienna, 1815 was a landmark event for the development of international law. It was the first important European conference where many rules of International Law were formulated, e.g., rules relating to international rivers, classification of diplomatic agents, etc.[25]

Declaration of Paris, 1856:-

The Declaration of Paris was a lawmaking treaty in which many rules relating to naval welfare were laid down. Attack on undefended people during naval war was prohibited. It was also laid that enemy ships could be sunk or otherwise destroyed during war but before doing so, precautions should be taken to save the life of the crew of the ship.[26]

Geneva Convention, 1864:-

Many rules relating to the wounded and sick members of the armed forces during land warfare were laid down in Geneva Convention of 1864. Killing of wounded soldiers prohibited and rules were made for providing certain facilities to them.[27]

Hague Conference, 1899 and 1907:-

Hague Conference of 1899 and 1907 are rightly reckoned as great landmarks relating to the development of international law. They resulted in the adoption of several conventions of various subjects of international concern. This conference emphasized the settlement of International disputes through peaceful means. Many rules of International Law relating to land warfare and naval warfare were formulated. Bombardment over undefended people was declared illegal. Endeavour was also made to determine the limits of armament and to achieve ultimately disarmament. Duties and rights of neutral States during naval war were also clearly laid down. Yet another great contribution of the Hague Conference was the establishment of the permanent of Court of Arbitration. It was a landmark event in the history of the Development of International Law.[28]

The League of Nations:-

After the First World War, the nations of the world felt the need of an International Organization which might be able not only to regulate amicably the mutual relations among the nations but may also prevent future wars. The League of Nations was established under the Treaty of Versailles, 1919. The League of Nations, for the first time, imposed certain restrictions upon the Nation’s rights to resort to war at their will. The covenant of the League of Nations provided that before resorting to war, they would first settle their dispute through arbitration, judicial settlement or equity by council. It was also provided that even if their disputes were not solved through these means, they would not go to war until the lapse of three months after such failure. It was further laid down that a member of the League going to war in violation or disregard of the provisions of the covenant would be deemed to be enemy of the whole League of Nations. Yet another great achievement of the League of Nations was the establishment of the permanent Court of International Justice which contributed much to the progressive development International law. The covenant of the League of Nations was in fact, a law-making International Treaty. It was the auspicious beginning of a good trend. After it, the development of International Law owed mostly to law-making International Treaties.[29]

Thus after the establishment of the United Nations the development of International Law has been effected mainly through multi-lateral law-making treaties. Intentional Law, or for that matter any law, can effective only if it is flexible changeable and adaptable. In order to be effective and living, it must adapt itself in accordance with the changing times and circumstances. The chief objective of International Law is to establish the rule of law in international field and to ensure the maintenance of International peace and security.[30]

Theoretical perspective:

In order to further elaborate theoretical implications of the idea of multiculturalism, it is useful to link it to the wider conception of society. Subsequently we will analyze two forms of liberalism procedural and substantive and show that the first one tends to support and the second one to reject group rights. Such difference has an important impact on comprehending democratic multiculturalism.

Immanuel Kant’s concept of individual’s autonomy, according to which every person has a right to define for himself or herself what is good, can be considered the basis of procedural theory of society. It derives from the principle of autonomy that since different people do it differently the state itself should not formulate one substantive viewpoint that ought to be followed by everybody. It is important to note that Kant’s moral philosophy as a whole remains on formal grounds. It proceeds from his overall philosophical disposition as well as the desire to achieve the certainty characteristic of natural sciences in philosophy as well. In Kant’s view this would be possible in moral philosophy only in case of a formalistic system. If to present substantial arguments as well, then their scientific essence would be lost as they cannot be universal.

Growth of Multiculturalism

From a historical point of view, multiculturalism signifies a time of transition and represents a reworking of local, national, regional and worldwide identities and interrelations. To arrive at a multi-perspective view this treatment probes several vortexes around which multiculturalism takes shape cultural flux, citizenship, everyday experience, politics of recognition, and political economy and class. If the common variable is politics of difference, upon closer consideration difference itself turns out to host very different notions. [31]

In order to understand a phenomenon it is always useful to place it in a historical context. If we do it in this case, we notice that multiculturalism has, during the last decades, become one of the major factors of contemporary politics. As a logical sequel, the notion of ‘multiculturalism’ has moved from periphery to the center in social science discourse as well. It can be claimed that the self-reflection of the society can rest either upon the notion of ‘unity’ or ‘difference’. The point here is about tendency that at certain times and under certain circumstances the dominating tendency is to conceptualize the society as a whole and its sub-units in ‘terms’ of unity, while under other circumstances and periods in terms of ‘difference’. The orientation that stresses unity emphasizes concepts like ‘entirety’, ‘co-operation’, ‘function’, ‘structure’, ‘element’, etc. The other trend emphasizes concepts such as ‘diversity’, ‘peculiarity’, ‘contradiction’, ‘conflict’, etc. The notion of ‘multiculturalism’ is based on the orientation related to the notions of ‘difference’ and ‘diversity’.

However, the emergence of the issue of multiculturalism in global scope must be seen in the context of polarization between states: on one side there are rich Western countries that are becoming increasingly rich and on the other poor developing countries whose relative poverty continues to grow. According to the data of UNDP global human development report of 1999 the income difference dynamics between the five richest and five poorest countries in the world during the last 40 years look as follows:

In 1997 it was 74-fold, in 1990 60-fold and in 1960 30- fold. One of the results of such difference is extensive economic migration from the poor countries to the rich that is characteristic of the whole post-World War II period. The migration has slowed down to a certain extent since 1970s in connection with the new economic situation, but continues in one way or another up to now. Since the end of 1980s the former Communist world has also become one of the sources of economic migration.

The problem of multiculturalism has been defined differently in different countries, whereat the approaches of Germany and France can be considered the two extremes of possible strategies. The goal of the immigration policy in Germany has been to give the children of immigrants as much knowledge of the language, culture and homeland of their ancestors as possible. The goal of French policy has been, by contrast, to socialize immigrants through education into French culture as tightly as possible. The background of such a difference is the fact that in Germany aliens have been considered as guest workers who should once leave the country, whereas in France they have been considered as an assimilating group.

One more reason for the powerful emergence of multicultural problems should be pointed out. The principal keyword of the present stage of the development of mankind is the information society. This brings along new hopes and concerns. The confrontation between globalization and identity is becoming one of the central problems. One of the leading contemporary sociologist Manuel Castells eloquently describes it as “schizophrenia between function and meaning”. Globalization primarily concerns the instrumental dimension of human activity, upon which the pragmatic interest of the social elite thrusts its integrative logic. Counter-reaction involves a wider public, their emotions, aspirations and identity.

The information revolution and the rapid development of the world economy in the second half of the 20th century are building up a network society which creates unprecedented opportunities, simultaneously destroying the existing fundamental social and intellectual structure. The reason is that the changes in identity are much slower. Thus there appears a vacuum that is filled by various forms of protest, contesting the integrative logic and instrumentality of the network. The social bearers of protest will be groups and probably whole regions, which, through the structural shift in the movement of capital, information exchange and in the labor market are pushed ever further from the resources that facilitate coping in the 21st century. The more people feel themselves at the mercy of global impersonal forces, the greater is the need for something intimate and understandable that is offered by ethnic and cultural identification. This need is turning into an important factor in internal politics, because minority cultures not just exist, but demand ever louder their recognition as equal subjects in the framework of politics of recognition.

Many doors to multiculturalism

Multiculturalism is a moving target. The term refers both to an ongoing cultural flux and to tenuous institutional arrangements. Institutional multiculturalism is typically criticized from diverse points of view conservative (`too much) and progressive (`too little’). Diverse stakeholders either resent being ignored or being stereotyped. As an institutional arrangement multiculturalism is both a target of criticisms and a reform platform. Indeed there are many doors to multiculturalism. From a historical point of view multiculturalism probably signifies a time of transition, which represents a reworking of local, national, regional and worldwide identities and interrelations. Whither multiculturalism implies the question which multiculturalism. One way to address the question is by probing the various vortexes around which multiculturalism takes shape citizenship, cultural flux, everyday multiculturalism, politics of difference, questions of class and bottom-line multiculturalism. Multiculturalism comes in 47 varieties that address these concerns in different ways. Then we come back to the question whither multiculturalism.[32]

Multiculturalism is growing by leaps and bounds due to three driving forces:

(i) Increased Communication Speed and the Internet Highway.

(ii) Emigration and Immigration.

(iii) Multinational Enterprises with their explosive expansions.

Any of several artistic movements since about the 1960s that have challenged the philosophy and practices of modern arts or literature. In literature, this has amounted to a reaction against an ordered view of the world and therefore against fixed ideas about the form and meaning of texts. In its reaction against Modernist ideals such as auto telic art and the original masterpiece, postmodern writing and art emphasize devices such as pastiche and parody and the stylized technique of the antinovel and magic realism. Postmodernism has also led to a proliferation of critical theories, most notably deconstruction and its offshoots, and the breaking down of the distinction between “high” and “low” culture.[33]

Dialogic approach to culture places the phenomenon of multiculturalism on new grounds. If to assume that any culture is dialogic, it can be argued that multiculturalism is a normal form of existence of culture. Multiculturalism is not an exception but a rule, without multiculturalism there is no culture. It is important to notice that such an approach brings the possible practical problems connected with multiculturalism into a principally new light. It turns out that we are not dealing with a phenomenon that should or could be completely eliminated. If according to the Monologic approach (that is represented by procedural liberalism) multiculturalism is a deviation from the norm, then according to the dialogic approach it is rather a resource. This does not imply that multiculturalism can not cause problems.

Multiculturalism is both a potential resource and a problem, but the dialogic approach constructs it as normal and thus not requiring elimination. Monologic cultural discourse, on the contrary, constructs multiculturalism as a deviation from the norm and presumes that the solution lies in its elimination. As a conclusion, one can say that dialogic approach changes a basic presumption and thus helps to accommodate possible conflicts related to multiculturalism.

The path to multiculturalism has thus been facilitated by numerous declarations and texts of an international nature in which this defence is resent, for example in the Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 of which stipulates that everyone, as a member of society . . . is entitled to realization . . . . of he economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality. But, in the adoption of policies or of multiculturalists perspectives, the general orientations promoted by the UNO, UNESCO and others have ad less impact than the work of the societies in question on themselves, and the changes in their internal realities: the emergence of new demands which, until now, were granted very little political and institutional space; the transformation of political systems, organizations and institutions confronted with these demands; and in their increased capacity to implement social policies or to ensure the working of the Welfare State, etc.

Growth of International Law which affects the Multiculturalism:

The term multiculturalism generally refers to the acceptance of various cultural divisions for the sake of diversity that applies to the demographic make-up of a specific place, usually at the scale of an organization such as a school, business, neighborhood, city or nation. Some countries have official, or de jure policies of multiculturalism aimed at recognizing and allowing members of distinct groups within that society to celebrate and maintain their different cultures or cultural identities as a way to promote social cohesion. In this context, multiculturalism advocates a society that extends equitable status to distinct ethnic and religious groups, with no identifiable ethnical and/or religious culture treated as a single norm to which everyone has to adhere to. Many societies are divided on the question whether multiculturalism is desirable and the theory remains controversial.

Examples of the growth of Multiculturalism:


There has an International Trade contract between Bangladesh and USA. In that contract there has a clause that Bangladesh can sale Michel Jackson’s solo album (Black & White). After this contract Bangladeshi media is showing advertisement of that album. For the purpose of advertisement the media in this album’s music show introduced Michel Jackson in a new design’s Pant and Shirt. The people of the Bangladesh like that design’s Pant and Shirt. Some peoples are wearing that design’s Pant and Shirt. For that reason the selling of that Pant and Shirt has been increased. Finally, we can say that the people of Bangladesh are affected by Michel Jackson’s Pant and Shirt.


The last base of the Islam is ‘Hajj’. The devoutly pious people go to ‘Macaw & Medina’ for obeying ‘hajj’ in every year. The Bangladeshi media are live broadcasting the recital of ‘Hajj”. It affect on the devoutly pious people of the Bangladesh. It creates fear, faith and allegiance for Allah. Eid-ul-Fitor and Eid-ul-Azha this two Eid are observing and performing by the Muslim community with inspired with deep of religious gravity.

Internet & Dish antenna:

Now in this day the most common example for affect growth of multiculturalism by development international law is using Internet and dish antenna. Peoples are directly affected by the Internet and using of dish antenna. The people of Bangladesh are observing different movies and TV serial of the different TV channel. Peoples are directly affected by the culture, dress and language of the TV serial.


Sports are one of the most commonly affected of the growth of multiculturalism by the development international law. When a cricket tournament or sports are being played between India & Pakistan then the whole country is divided into two camps. It is also seen in the Football tournament is being played between Argentina and Brazil. It is seriously affected the people who are the supporter of those team.

Food Habits:

Food habits are affected of the growth of multiculturalism by the development international law. People of the country take the western habit of foods. The teenagers like fast food they are depending on fast food. This food habits come from the Western culture.


Now a days culture of any country affect by the development of international law. Like that now we are observing and perform the culture of 31st night, New Year, Valentine Day etc, which come from the Western culture. The crowding of such types of Western cultures we are for getting our own culture, we are performing and observing that cultures.


In the light of the above discussion we found it that the development of international law affects the growth of multiculturalism. For this aspect we found that the development of international law affects our culture and lifestyle and also change the culture of the country. Though it is true that international law helps us and also solves many disputes of the international level. But it is true that the acceptance of international law in any way any purpose, any kinds of need of the society also affects the culture of any country and imposes a new multiculturalism for the nation. It is our habit that we always intimate the other countries culture; it is open by the development of international law.

The principal keyword of the present stage of the development of mankind is the information society. This brings along new hopes and concerns. The confrontation between globalization and identity is becoming one of the central problems. Globalization primarily concerns the instrumental dimension of human activity, upon which the pragmatic interest of the social elite thrusts its integrative logic. Counter-reaction involves a wider public, their emotions, aspirations and identity. The information revolution and the rapid development of the world economy in the second half of the 20th century are building up a network society which creates unprecedented opportunities, simultaneously destroying the existing fundamental social and intellectual structure.

The reason is that the changes in identity are much slower. Thus there appears a vacuum that is filled by various forms of protest, contesting the integrative logic and instrumentality of the network. The social bearers of protest will be groups and probably whole regions, which, through the structural shift in the movement of capital, information exchange and in the labor market are pushed ever further from the resources that facilitate coping in the 21st century. The more people feel themselves at the mercy of global impersonal forces, the greater is the need for something intimate and understandable that is offered by ethnic and cultural identification. This need is turning into an important factor in internal politics, because minority cultures not just exist, but demand ever louder their recognition as equal subjects in the framework of politics of recognition.

So, now we can realize that development of international law though helps us and it also affect our own culture and open the different culture to us. Now a day we are become and changing our culture by the Western culture. Because we take the Western culture and also follow it, for that reason it affect the growth of multiculturalism.

We, now have a clearer view both of the issues involved and the limits of multiculturalism as an answer to the challenges posed by the existence of cultural differences in modern democracies. At first sight, multiculturalism must provide a mode of conciliation of universal principles rights and reason and specific values, while avoiding the impasse of abstract universalism, which negates differences, and the deviation of communitarianism a factor of intercommunity violence and restriction of personal autonomy for those involved. To be operational, it demands democratic arrangements enabling us to evaluate how the differences in question appear in the public sphere, and to discuss them on the basis of real knowledge.

[1]. S. Hoffman, ‘International System and International Law,’ 14 world Politics, 1961-2, p-205.

[2]. Malcolm N. Shaw; International Law, Fourth Edition, p-39.

[3]. Ibid, p-36

[4]. International law, Barrister Harun ur Rashid, Third Edition, 2003, p-2

[5]. International Law and Human Rights, Dr. S. K. Kapoor, Twelfth Edition; P-1

[6]. International law by Rebecca M.m, Wallace; Third Edition; p-2

[7]. International Law, Barrister Harun ur Rashid; Third Edition: 2003; p-3.

[8]. Ibid, p-1.

[9]. Ibid, p-1.

[10]. L. Oppenheim, International Law (New York, Long ham’s Green & Co., 1905) pp.1-2.

[11]. Ibid p-2.

[12]. International Law, Barrister Harun Ur Rashid; Third Edition: 2003; p-22.

[13]. Ibid p-1.

[14]. (1927) P.C. Series A. No. 10

[15]. Ibid p-3.

[16]. Ibid p-3.

[17]. Ibid, p-8.

[18]. Kallen, Evelyn, “Multiculturalism: Ideology, Policy and Reality”, Journal of Canadian Studies 17 (1) 1982.

[19]. Ethnic and Racial Studies Volume 21 Number 5 September 1998



[22]. Merriam-Webster’s definition of postmodernism.

[23]. Ruth Reichl, Cook’s November 1989; American Heritage Dictionary’s definition of the postmodern.

[24]. Literary Dictionary: postmodernism

[25]. International Law and Human Rights, Dr. S. K. Kapoor, Twelfth Edition; p-30

[26]. Ibid, p-30

[27]. Ibid, p-30

[28]. Ibid, p-30

[29]. Ibid, p-31.

[30]. Ibid, p-32.

[31]. Social Identities, 7 (3), 2001: 393-407

[32]. In Barbara Saunders and David Haljan (eds). A politics of dissensus. Louvain, Leuven University Press, 2003, 21-34

[33]. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: postmodernism and