Comparative Study of Legal Particularism vis-à-vis International Law: American Exemptionalism vs. European Union Pluralism

Universalism is defined as applying the rules of International Law equally for all States or entities, while particularism is defined as a situation wherein a State or an entity seeks applying its particular values and norms even if they are assumed against or inconsistent with the universal rules. The particularistic States or entities seek to find the means and methods through which they can have the possibility of escaping the dominance and rules of international law wherever they find the international law against their interests and values, or at least they can bring it to their own accord. As two key actors in the international politics and relations, the EU and the US government by adopting positions and practices that differ from the universal rules have institutionalized a particularistic approach to international law. The US and the EU take advantages of similar practices in their own particularistic approach. Applying double standards, using alternative interpretations and unilateralism are some examples of such practices. American particularism is based on sovereignty and the reliance on military power, and this has led the US particularistic approach suffer from the exemptionalism. In contrast, the European Union has displayed a sensible, purposeful and moderate particularism.