By Andrea Bianchi, Professor in International Law at the Graduate Institute.

Thirty-five years ago the late Harvard Law Professor and International Court of Justice Judge Richard R. Baxter wrote in the International and Comparative Law Quarterly an article – “International law in her infinite variety” – that is very well known and often cited in international legal scholarship. Baxter meant to refer to the almost infinite variety of the ways in which international normativity can manifest itself, from the binding character of treaty rules to the wide array of soft law instruments that, even back then, were increasingly adopted by states and other international law actors to set up international normative standards.

Looking back after so many years, one cannot but notice that “the infinite variety” is not only concerned with its different types of rules, but with the whole of international law itself. International law bears on all matters of contemporary concern: peace and security, health, trade, investment, environment, and human rights protection both in peacetime and in times of armed conflict. Practically all areas of social life and regulation are affected by international or transnational legal standards.  International law is present in our everyday life. If letters reach our relatives far away on other continents or if we are able to board a plane, take off and land in an airport in another country, this is due to the operation of international agreements and international institutions. Making payments across borders or investing in foreign countries is also made possible by international law.

Doubts are occasionally raised about the effectiveness - or even the existence – of international law when things go dramatically wrong. The incapacity of international law to free the world from the scourge of war, to eliminate international terrorism, or to wipe out human rights violations come to mind as apt illustrations. The irony of this is that nobody would question the existence or the utility of domestic law because murders are still committed or because burglaries are on the rise! Yet such is the fate of international law! It always comes with a promise of a better world. And cynics are there to warn us that this is unlikely to happen and that such a promise is doomed to be broken.

At the same time, international law represents an emancipatory project for all those people who see in it the potential for fostering progress and for enhancing the condition of humankind. Human rights and international criminal justice are brandished as instruments of justice to eradicate evil and punish the perpetrators of heinous acts against human dignity. Idealists find their home in an often-romanticised version of international law, where law is synonymous with justice.

Others look at international law in rather pragmatic terms as an instrument whereby international intercourse takes place and day-to-day international business is carried out. It is a tool to get things ‘legal’ done across boundaries. At times it may not work, as is the case with any other human endeavour, but its existence is not called into question and its overall performance is regarded as satisfactory, short of any unreasonable expectation about improving the state of the world.

The cynical view, the romantic vision and the pragmatic approach could also be seen as different ways of apprehending international law in its (almost) infinite variety. Like in a kaleidoscope, the assembly of patterns and the change in colours vary depending on how the one who holds the tube twists it and bends it in different directions. The myriad forms that can be seen can have a mesmerising effect and the eye needs time to adjust to their variety and to focus on them. It is never easy to put up with variety, let alone an infinite one! But the complexity of international law makes this an inevitable challenge for any international lawyer.

A final insight from Baxter’s text is worth addressing. Towards the end of his article, Baxter equated the role of the international lawyer – who has at her disposal such a wide array of legal instruments – with that of a social engineer.  By interpreting the law, by spotting the applicable legal rules, and by resorting to dispute settlement mechanisms, international lawyers promote and direct social change. In other words, they have the opportunity to fine-tune the law and to adjust it to societal demands. In doing so, they are not the neutral conveyors of an alleged objectivity that the law would possess in and of itself. Any time they interpret the law in whatever capacity they act (judge, counsel or academic), international lawyers make choices that affect the ordering of society and the allocation of power within it. This task carries with it significant responsibility.

It would be desirable that tomorrow’s international lawyers be well prepared to deal with the infinite variety of international law and that the choices that they will have to make in their different professional capacity be inspired by and geared towards communal values. The Graduate Institute’s International Law Department is fully committed to providing its students and future legal professionals with the necessary skills to fulfil such an important task. Ultimately, however, how to use and what to make of “international law in her infinite variety” is for each and every one of us to decide. What we choose in our daily professional activities will shape the future we (want to) build.

This article was published in Globe, the Institute Review and in Le Temps on 5 March 2015. It is the first article in this edition's dossier on future challenges in international law.