2. Zhou Wei’s Education in China and France

Zhou Wei was born on 15 July 1883 in Shouzhou, in the north-central part of Anhui Province of the East China region. ^{Footnote 31} His family originally hailed from Zhenyuan, located in the eastern part of Guizhou Province in the Southwest Region of China. ^{Footnote 32} He was initially educated in a provincial government college in Nanchang for two years and was later, in September 1903, hand-picked by the governor of Jiangxi to take an entrance exam in Beijing for admission to the newly established College of Languages of the Imperial University of Peking, which had been established to train linguists and diplomats for China’s nascent diplomatic service. ^{Footnote 33} Zhou rewarded the governor’s confidence when he stood out in the exam and was admitted to study French. ^{Footnote 34} One of his main instructors was P. E. Blanchet, a former French diplomat based in China. ^{Footnote 35} He was exposed to the thoughts and influence of an experienced diplomat since then. In addition to French, he took classes on ethics, Chinese literature, history, geography, diplomacy, finance, and law. ^{Footnote 36}

In 1905, an imperial decree designated Zhou and some fellow students as government scholars who would be sent for further education to universities in the West as part of China’s modernization efforts. ^{Footnote 37} The government wanted these students to return to China equipped with Western languages, technical knowledge, and expertise. Chinese officials intended to utilize the newly acquired expertise and skills of the students to counter the strength of foreign powers and ward off the latter’s growing encroachment upon China’s sovereignty. Because of Zhou’s knowledge of French, he was sent to France and arrived in Paris at the end of 1905, but he looked to a future as an engineer ^{Footnote 38} and enrolled at the Institut Industriel du Nord in 1907, an engineering school in Lille situated at the northern tip of France. He completed three years of study and practice as an engineer ^{Footnote 39} and thereafter pursued a specialization in civil engineering in at the École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées (ENPC) in Paris, one of the oldest, most prestigious French Grandes Écoles. ^{Footnote 40} He received his diploma as a civil engineer in bridges and roadways in February 1914. ^{Footnote 41}

However, by late 1912, while Zhou was studying at the ENPC,Footnote ⁴² he had become interested in the study of law, due perhaps in no small part to the Xinhai Revolution in China which overthrew the Qing dynasty and accelerated various political and legal reforms in the Middle Kingdom. Zhou applied and gained admission to the Faculty of Law at the University of Paris in December 1912, ^{Footnote 43} where he was first exposed to public international law in Europe. Apart from that, Zhou pursued a standard legal curriculum that covered courses including civil law, criminal law, constitutional law, French legal history, private international law, and political economy. He passed these exams and was conferred the Licence en droit in October 1915. ^{Footnote 44}

Zhou desired to obtain a doctorate in law before returning home to join the civil service, but his plans to further his legal education in Paris were thwarted when the First World War broke out in July 1914. Germany’s invasion of Belgium in August 1914 presaged France’s entry into the Great War. International law professors Gaston Jezé and Joseph Barthélemy, with whom he desired to work, had been called up for enlistment as war escalated. ^{Footnote 45} Although the outbreak of the war interrupted his studies, it was its brutality that would leave indelible marks on his intellectual development. ^{Footnote 46}

3. Zhou Wei’s doctoral studies in Switzerland and his research

Owing to the circumstances of the war, Zhou moved to Switzerland to continue his legal education and registered with the Faculty of Law of the University of Geneva in the winter semester of 1915. ^{Footnote 47} Switzerland offered the benefits of being a neutral state and of having well-established French-speaking law schools. However, this stint was short-lived; he transferred to the University of Fribourg in early 1916 to continue his doctoral research. ^{Footnote 48}

The Faculty of Law at the University of Fribourg had never admitted a Chinese student, and Zhou Wei became its first. Yet his journey to a doctorate was not without obstacles. To obtain his doctorate, Zhou had to satisfy comprehensive requirements by submitting a satisfactory dissertation, passing two written tests, and undergoing an oral examination. ^{Footnote 49}

Zhou’s dissertation is of significance. Due to the widespread destruction and horrors of the war, he focused on proposals for establishing organizations that could promote global peace and security. He was convinced that international law had potential to achieve this lofty goal. His dissertation was provisionally titled at its time of submission: ‘Essai sur l’Organisation du droit international’, or ‘Essay on the organization of international law’. ^{Footnote 50} Experts in international law supervised his dissertation; the Dean appointed Emile Bise, Professor of International Law, Criminal Procedure, Criminal Law, Legal History as the first examiner, ^{Footnote 51} and Ulrich Lambert, Professor of General Public Law and Law of Nations, Ecclesiastical Law, Legal Philosophy as the second examiner. ^{Footnote 52}

Zhou’s dissertation became relevant following the First World War. When several proposals for an international organization of states surfaced, Zhou’s dissertation was among them. Central to his proposals was the idea of sanctions under international law, an idea given prominence by Otfried Nippold, a German-Swiss jurist, pacifist and internationalist. ^{Footnote 53} Zhou deliberated on whether it would ‘be possible to find a way of avoiding such disasters in the future by replacing the brutal reign of armed violence with the peaceful settlement of international conflicts.’ ^{Footnote 54} He held the conviction that ‘[a]s long as war remains the only final means of claiming or defending the law, the world will never emerge from barbarism, [and] international society will be plunged forever into anarchy and darkness’. ^{Footnote 55} As a result, he was committed to using the toolkit of international law ‘[t]o organize the international society legally in such a way that all future international conflicts can be decided solely by law’. ^{Footnote 56}

It must be acknowledged that Zhou’s proposal of an international/supranational organization to maintain peace was not novel; rather, he took inspiration from the writings of Confucius, the paragon of Chinese sages, and numerous historical episodes in China’s long history to buttress his proposals. His ideas were also a product of the patrimony of European ideas and writings: dating back to the French King Henry IV, and continuing with Maximilien de Béthune, French author Charles-Irénée Castel, abbé de Saint-Pierre, English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, German philosopher Immanuel Kant, Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, to the French medical doctor Philippe-Rene Marchand. ^{Footnote 57} These figures had proposed ideas for a confederation of states tasked with peacefully resolving state-to-state conflicts by legal means. Even so, he observed, ‘[A]pparently aware of the lack of preparation of the men of their time for such new ideas and anxious to avoid the reproach of utopia, they did not go into the details of the organization of their vision of the future and the functioning of their ideal of a federated state’. ^{Footnote 58}

At the time of his proposals, the war had negated the efforts of the international community to achieve progress. While the Hague Peace Treaties of 1899 and 1907 had laid the groundwork for resolving international conflicts peacefully through several institutional mechanisms, ^{Footnote 59} the war showed that piecemeal measures were unable to maintain peace. Zhou argued that ‘[t]he reigns of peace through law has now become the goal to be attained, and in order to establish the rule of law on land, it is important to equip it with the unthinkable organs for its manifestation’. ^{Footnote 60} Piecemeal treaties would not be sufficient for such a gargantuan task. A more comprehensive, omnibus approach to preserving peace would be required.

Zhou provided a framework of how this could be achieved. He initially weighed two viable models to secure world peace through international law. In the first model, all states would be required by international law to ‘spontaneously and simultaneously disarm … so that law may reign without the use of force’. ^{Footnote 61} Such a model would remove arms from aggressors in a way akin to removing teeth from a dangerous tiger. The second model entailed uniting and organizing ‘independent forces of organized states to make them into an international force, capable of imposing the respect due to international law and punishing those states or individuals who violate it, in parallel with domestic law and national justice’. ^{Footnote 62} This model did not remove arms but instead punished states for violations of international law. It was akin to introducing a circus master to train and tame a dangerous tiger by force. He eventually settled on the second model. The question was whether international law had reached the epochal stage such that it would be possible to command authority and respect – by an international force of arms if necessary – ‘in all matters of international relations, either between states and nations or between subjects of different nations’. ^{Footnote 63}

Zhou envisioned international law as an invisible force, superior to that of military force, that could compel states to act in a certain manner. ^{Footnote 64} For Zhou, international law’s constructive force was already evident in the way that belligerent states strove to justify their part in the ongoing war by arguing that ‘their cause [was] just, that it [was] law and humanity that they defend[ed] by arms … [that] their enemies [were the ones] who [were] waging an unjust war and violating the principles of law’. ^{Footnote 65} Nevertheless, Zhou deplored the fact that the moral preponderance of international law was ‘purely theoretical’. It did not ‘stop the use of brutal force’, nor ‘in any way lessen the rigours and horrors of war, the cruelties, the barbarities, and the most frightening destruction’. ^{Footnote 66} He refused to accept the view that there were ‘no other means of demanding and sanctioning justice and law than the brutal use of weapons’. ^{Footnote 67} He was, however, acutely aware that the Achilles’ heel of international law was its lack of a unified political organization to enforce it. ^{Footnote 68}

Therefore, to address the age-old problem of war and secure ‘the hope of a lasting, if not perpetual, universal legal peace’, ^{Footnote 69} Zhou argued in the second part of his work that it was imperative to establish new international organs for the administration of international law. Such organs would include:

1. 1. The International Parliament for the enactment of international law applicable to all states and individuals;

2. 2. The International Courts to judge state conduct according to international law; and

3. 3. The International Administration to enforce, with military aid, all international legal decisions and judgments. ^{Footnote 70}

Zhou argued that ‘the only way to organize [the effective use of] international law practically and rationally would be to establish the three international powers simultaneously’. ^{Footnote 71} He suggested that the International Parliament could use its legislative powers to promote international peace. ^{Footnote 72} and that international judicial organs ought to have enforcement powers to do likewise. ^{Footnote 73} He also discussed, at length, his vision for establishing an international executive power with administrative functions to promote international peace. ^{Footnote 74}

There were two noteworthy aspects of Zhou’s proposals, chief of which was that he went into detail about how these bodies should be organized. For example, he discussed how the members of the International Parliament and International Court should be appointed. He fixed the precise terms of their office, their numbers, rights and privileges, and their exact salary. ^{Footnote 75} Additionally, he reasoned that this proposed International Administration would include a Department of Finance, Department of Justice, Department of Foreign Affairs, as well as armed forces with their usual attributes under the traditional state paradigm. ^{Footnote 76} He attempted to determine what would be the appropriate legal sanctions against states, social groups, or individuals for various wrongs. ^{Footnote 77}

The second noteworthy aspect of Zhou’s proposals was his use of examples involving China. For instance, he invoked the example of China’s use of popular boycotts in the past to seek redress against international grievances to illustrate the novel use of boycotts. To do so, he distinguished between a ‘popular or national boycott exercised by the people or the nation’ and a ‘universal judicial boycott exercised by the states’. ^{Footnote 78} He argued that the Chinese people first deployed the popular boycott, a peaceful tool of international economic sanction against America in reaction to a string of anti-Chinese events in 1905, ^{Footnote 79} later against Japan in 1908 over the Tatsu Maru incident, ^{Footnote 80} and also against France in 1916 over the Laoxikai Incident in Tianjin. ^{Footnote 81} He also raised examples of other similar boycotts which took place in other countries. ^{Footnote 82} Zhou argued that boycotts or embargoes would be an effective measure to ensure compliance with international law:

Zhou suggested that the use of the national or popular boycott together with ‘an international judicial boycott’ would make the measure most efficacious. ^{Footnote 84} He intended for the latter to include the ‘closure of the financial markets of the world; stoppage of all commerce, all traffic, all transportation, etc.; suspension or annulment of commercial treaties concluded with all the states’. ^{Footnote 85}

Zhou was nevertheless cognizant of plausible objections to his proposals. In reply to one oft-raised counterargument that the boycotting states would suffer enormous pecuniary losses that would amount to a severe self-inflicted wound, he retorted by arguing that the losses of the boycotted states would outweigh the losses suffered by the boycotting states. Furthermore, provision could be made for boycotting states to seek compensatory damages from the boycotted states, and such compensation would extend to costs incurred in staging the boycott. ^{Footnote 86} Another objection was the lack of incentive for states with close mutual economic ties to the wrongdoer state to comply and execute these sanctions against that state. Although Zhou’s response may seem unjustifiably dismissive, he was confident that states with close economic relations with the delinquent/wrongdoer state would agree to execute these sanctions because refusal to do so would amount to an international wrong; those states would not want to put themselves at risk of being subject to the same severe penalties as the first wrongdoer. ^{Footnote 87}

4. Evaluation of Zhou’s dissertation and his written examinations

Zhou’s doctoral dissertation fared well when presented to his examiners. At the suggestion of Bise, Zhou changed the title of his dissertation from ‘Essay on the organization of international law’ ^{Footnote 88} to ‘Essay on the organization of international society’. Bise reasoned that the change was appropriate because Zhou provided a ‘palpably (tangible) detailed plan’ for the ‘future of the federation of the nations of the world’: they would be governed by a ‘common constitutional type’ to ensure the ‘continuity of peace and the elimination of armed conflicts’. ^{Footnote 89} This opinion was echoed by the second examiner, Ulrich Lampert, who concurred that ‘international law should not be organized, but should be made more effective through the organization of people’. ^{Footnote 90}

The examiners also praised and criticized Zhou’s dissertation in several respects.

First, Bise praised the significance of Zhou’s research considering the ongoing war and opined that the dissertation was of ‘exceptional topicality’. ^{Footnote 91} He noted that international law experts had previously concluded that it was possible, at least theoretically, to establish an international federation endowed with organs similar to that of a sovereign state. Zhou’s work reaffirmed that the ‘construction of the international state’ was ‘not unrealistic’, and it added to existing literature by ‘present[ing] the elements of this construction’. ^{Footnote 92}

Second, Bise favourably commented that Zhou’s proposition for the legal organization of an international society was ‘not only a statement of doctrine’, but that it would ‘encourage the weak and the hesitant’ by demonstrating that there are like-minded people who also are assiduously striving towards the ‘invaluable benefit of perpetual peace’. ^{Footnote 93} Bise agreed with Zhou that the doctrines and the principles of international law should not hamper this goal.

Third, Bise appreciated that the work was a combination of ‘doctrinal conceptions of the man of science with the practical realities of the technician builder’. ^{Footnote 94} This was due in no small part to Zhou’s strong civil engineering background and the salience of exactitude he sought in the design of his proposed institutions and rules. He regarded Zhou’s proposals as reflecting the ‘classical style of the modern constitutional state’, being ‘perfectly habitable’ and providing the ‘solution to the problem’. ^{Footnote 95} He nevertheless qualified his approval that the work was not perfect and that ‘some architectural details and certain aspects of the layout’ were open to criticism. ^{Footnote 96}

Fourth, both examiners were generally satisfied with the scientific value of Zhou’s work. Bise presented a balanced evaluation:

Lambert similarly wrote:

Fifth, Lambert alluded to Zhou’s apparent focus in some parts of his dissertation on the plight of China in international law and noted that ‘[a]s a citizen of the Middle Kingdom, he had been able to sufficiently consider the weaknesses of international law to the detriment of his own country’. ^{Footnote 99}

Indeed, Zhou’s dissertation benefited from his cultural background and knowledge, which allowed him to use ancient Chinese history and historical practices to draw analogies between the West and China. His goal was to help western scholars appreciate China’s role in the development of international law. For example, when Zhou discussed the history of international arbitration, he contended that this practice was already widespread in ancient China since the tenth and eleventh centuries BC ^{Footnote 100} He relied on the acclaimed work of W. A. P. Martin, to confirm the early origin and practice of international law in ancient China. ^{Footnote 101} Moreover, Zhou claimed that arbitration had been a ‘frequent occurrence between the warring kingdoms’, and that ancient Chinese works (such as the Zuo Chuan, Shi Ji, Guo Ce, etc.) indicate that before the reunification of China by Emperor Qin, many arbitrations were concluded between the warring states. ^{Footnote 102} As another example, he drew on his knowledge of national boycotts by the Chinese people against Western powers to illustrate the adept use of international law and practice. ^{Footnote 103}

The examiners did, however, provide some criticism. First, Bise thought that Zhou ‘[gave] his ideas but [did] not engage much in general with those of other authors’; that ‘the quotations drawn from the very abundant literature are rare and sparse’; and that one ‘has the impression that we are more in the presence of an engineer than a lawyer’. ^{Footnote 104}

Second, Lambert thought that Zhou’s primary legal education in France made him too wedded to French legal thinking on several significant aspects, which affected some of his judgments. Moreover, Zhou’s lack of familiarity with German legal literature was also a disadvantage ^{Footnote 105} and it led him to venture some unjustified assertions:

Third, Bise noted that Zhou’s style needed ‘significant correction’. He nevertheless appreciated that ‘one must take into account [Zhou’s] previous training, his ethnic mentality foreign to the European academic process, and language difficulties’. ^{Footnote 107} It is worth noting at this juncture that scholarship had always been subject to stylistic bias; it still remains a barrier in academic language and discourse today.

Despite those criticisms, the two examiners agreed on a verdict of approval for Zhou’s dissertation. Bise recommended that Zhou should receive the high grade of Magna Cum Laude for his dissertation in his report of April 1916, ^{Footnote 108} and Lampert noted in his report six months later that Zhou should eliminate several repetitions before its publication, but he otherwise had no reservations in recommending that Zhou be awarded the same high grade for his dissertation. ^{Footnote 109}

In addition to the dissertation requirement, Zhou had to pass a written and an oral exam. In June 1916, after Bise had given his first report of acceptance, Zhou wrote to Dean Legras asking to be exempted from the oral exam, ^{Footnote 110} describing his educational background and drawing attention to the fact that his first law degree (with good results) was obtained in France. On this account, he requested that the faculty give him the same privileges afforded to graduates of the Licence en droit program at the University of Fribourg, who under the applicable rules would be exempt from oral examinations. ^{Footnote 111} The Faculty took his petition into account at its meeting in July, and upon deliberation they granted Zhou’s request for exemption. ^{Footnote 112}

One final academic requirement remained – to pass the written examination. For that, Zhou had 14 days to write two essays: one in his research field, which was public international law, and another in a different area of law, for which he chose French civil law. For the former, Zhou wrote on ‘The privilege of extraterritoriality in diplomatic law’, an area of considerable interest to him. ^{Footnote 113} For the latter, he wrote an essay entitled ‘The responsibility of land and water transport companies for goods’. ^{Footnote 114} Professor Bise graded the former while Dean Legras graded the latter. Both essays received a high grade of magna cum laude. ^{Footnote 115}

With the fulfillment of these academic requirements, the Faculty decided during its meeting in November 1916 to approve Zhou’s dissertation for the degree of the Docteur en droit (Doctor of Laws) with magna cum laude. He received his diploma in March 1917, ^{Footnote 116} making him the first Chinese to receive this degree in Switzerland.

5. Unprecedented election to the Institut de Droit International

Upon returning to China, Zhou joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as an assistant secretary and taught public international law on a part-time basis at Peking University Law School. His first assignment in the workings of international law to promote international peace and security came in early 1919 at the Paris Peace Conference, where Zhou was asked to be a member of the Secretariat of the Chinese delegation. ^{Footnote 117} After the end of the Conference, he became one of China’s diplomats based in the newly created League of Nations in Geneva. He must have been thrilled with this opportunity as this was an international organization that he envisaged in his doctoral dissertation three years ago.

Zhou was initially designated as an expert in the Chinese delegation to the First Assembly of the League of Nations held in Geneva from mid-November to mid-December 1920. ^{Footnote 118} When the League discussed the issue of opium and other dangerous drugs, Zhou took a strong interest in the topic because of China’s painful experience with the regulation and suppression of the opium trade in the middle of the nineteenth century. While discussing the League’s role in implementing the Hague Opium Convention, he was ‘rather in favour of asking for further restrictive measures in regard to opium’. ^{Footnote 119} The subsequent year, he received an appointment to serve as a member of the Sixth Committee of the Assembly to study political questions. ^{Footnote 120}

Subsequently in 1921, Zhou was elected to join the Institut de Droit International, one of the most prestigious academies devoted to the study and development of international law. ^{Footnote 121} Its founding members set up this society with the aim of being ‘independent of any governmental influence’. ^{Footnote 122} Membership was strictly limited to no more than 60 titular members and 60 associate members, ^{Footnote 123} and largely comprised eminent scholars in international law and notable diplomats.

The events leading up to Zhou’s election are significant. Since the war had forced the cancellation of the regular sessions of the Institute since 1914, its ranks had been depleted. ^{Footnote 124} It was not until 1921 that the Institute could convene a session, which took place in Rome. Thus the 1921 election was an extraordinary event. ^{Footnote 125} To replenish its members, the Institute met at the law faculty of the University of Paris in May 1921. ^{Footnote 126} Two people likely played a role in Zhou’s election. One was long-time Swiss member André Mercier, who was also the Secretary and Treasurer of the Institute. Zhou had worked with him at an organization called the ‘Central Organization for Sustainable Peace’ at The Hague in 1917 and was also a member of the Committee on International Sanctions chaired by Mercier. ^{Footnote 127} Because his doctoral dissertation had considered and analysed the issue of international sanctions in detail, Zhou’s involvement in the Committee’s work must have left a good impression on Mercier. The second person was André Weiss, Zhou’s public international law professor at the University of Paris, who was a respected titular member and elected Second Vice President of the Institute in 1919. ^{Footnote 128}

Many associate members were elected that year. In total, 36 new associate members were added, bringing the number of associate members to 58. ^{Footnote 129} It was also a year of many firsts. Zhou became the first Chinese member of the Institute.Footnote ¹³⁰ His doctoral dissertation was in full accord with the mission of the society, and this must have played a role in helping him win this rare opportunity. ^{Footnote 131} Francisco José Urrutia of Colombia, Rodrigo Octavio de Langaard Menezes of Brazil, and Francisco León de la Barra of Mexico were also the first from their countries to be elected. Simón Planas Suárez of Venezuela and Miguel Cruchaga Tocorna of Chile were the second of their countries to win an election. Two members also became the fifth and sixth members from Japan to be elected.

6. Zhou’s work at the League of Nations

Zhou worked in Geneva for seven years and served in various roles. He began his stint as the general secretary of the Chinese delegation to the League of Nations, before serving as the first secretary of the Chinese legation in Switzerland. He subsequently became the director of the Permanent Office at Geneva of the Chinese League of Nations Service. ^{Footnote 132}

Zhou actively represented Chinese interests in matters of importance throughout his career in the League. While Zhou was in the League’s Health Committee, there were health reports received by the Mandates Commission concerning mandated territories. Zhou spoke up in the interest of the Chinese diaspora who resided in mandated territories. ^{Footnote 133} Furthermore, as a member of the Economic Committee, Zhou advocated for fair and equal geographic representation in the membership of committees and sub-committees. In one instance, he expressed concern that the committee working on the revision of the text of the draft convention on the arbitration clause lacked representation from countries in the Far East. ^{Footnote 134} The Committee’s chairman recognized the validity of his observations and suggested that countries not represented on the sub-committee would be welcome to submit written suggestions to the Committee. ^{Footnote 135}

Zhou was also eager to reverse China’s inferior status in international law and relations that resulted from her humiliating defeat in the opium wars, and promote her standing in the international community. He strove to take a leadership role in committees on which he served in the League. In September 1924, he was elected vice-chairman of the Second Committee to conduct an inquiry on German capital abroad. ^{Footnote 136} In the same period, when the League’s attention turned to the work of the Committee on Intellectual Cooperation that was set up to ‘bridge the gulf between the enemies of the late war’ and to give ‘some guidance to the new nations … ’. ^{Footnote 137} Zhou expressed his displeasure with the lack of geographic and national representation in the Committee. He opined that a Chinese member should be added because ‘China was [already] an intellectual country at a time when Europe was in a rudimentary state of civilization’, and that ‘many of the most important scientific and mathematical discoveries’ originated from China. ^{Footnote 138} Zhou’s position stemmed from the enormous respect he had for Chinese intellectual and cultural traditions and he was unhappy that China’s cultural traditions had been snubbed by Western powers. While the resolution of the Fourth Assembly had emphasized the desirability of representing ‘not only the various intellectual methods but also the various national cultures’ across different countries, ^{Footnote 139} the Committee ultimately did not accede to his request. Zhou’s resolve did not waver, and he nevertheless repeated calls for Chinese representation on the Committee. ^{Footnote 140}

7. Zhou’s contribution to international lawmaking

Though Zhou was elected to the Institute in 1921, he only made his debut at the Institute’s session in The Hague in July 1925. ^{Footnote 141} This landmark session was set to coincide with the celebration of the 300^th anniversary of the publication of Grotius’ celebrated treatise, the De Jure Belli ac Pacis. Given the historical significance of the occasion, the session could boast a large attendance, with some eighty members hailing from 26 different countries. ^{Footnote 142}

The Session Records provide a rare glimpse into how Chinese international lawyers like Zhou participated in international law conferences and its soft lawmaking process. In a wide-ranging discussion concerning a report drafted by Greek jurist and diplomat, Nikolaos Sokrates Politis, and Belgian jurist, Charles de Visscher, on ‘Prescription in Public International Law’, ^{Footnote 143} Zhou intervened several times. One of his interventions concerned the proposition that ‘[t]he prescription for debt of private origin under the competent domestic law would render the claims inadmissible under international law, unless the grounds of this prescription contravene the rules of international law’. ^{Footnote 144} One of his colleagues Francisco José Urrutia of Colombia ‘pointed out that reference was made to prescription “according to the competent domestic law” and yet the possibility of a diplomatic claim for private debts was admitted’. ^{Footnote 145} Another participant, Alejandro Alvarez of Chile, also foresaw the dangers of abuse and ‘agree[d] in principle with Urrutia that there would be a serious danger of powerful States setting themselves up as judges of the law of small states: the internal sovereignty of those States would soon no longer exist’. ^{Footnote 146} Zhou was sympathetic to the legitimate concerns expressed by his two colleagues and expressed his view with diplomatic sensitivity and nuance:

While Zhou was with the Institute, he also proposed the formation of a commission to study a problem of crucial importance both to China and to his personal mission to eradicate all wars. The proposed commission should study the question of state responsibility for ‘crimes against the lives of aliens in times of peace, war and revolution’. ^{Footnote 148} In particular, Zhou wanted a solution to ‘prevent, and suppress if possible, any international war caused as a result of crimes committed against aliens’. ^{Footnote 149} The Institute accepted his proposal and constituted the Thirteenth Commission; Leo Strisower, a distinguished Austrian jurist and former president of the Institute would serve as the Rapporteur to study the question of ‘international responsibility of states for damage caused in their territory to the person or property of aliens’. ^{Footnote 150} Through Zhou’s perseverance and resourcefulness, the Institute ultimately adopted some of Zhou’s proposals in its final report.

Zhou built his stance on the law of state responsibility on the foundations laid by Wang Chung Hui, China’s foremost diplomat and jurist. Wang was instrumental in initiating a study of questions on state responsibility as a member of the Committee of Experts for the Progressive Codification of International Law under the auspices of the League of Nations. ^{Footnote 151} Zhou wanted to use the Institute’s stature and influence to further promote the study of state responsibility. In 1926, he submitted proposals to clarify the principles of state responsibility, ^{Footnote 152} which were discussed at the next session at Lausanne, Switzerland in 1927. His text comprised two parts. He first proposed a rule governing state responsibility and, following that, amendments to the draft report of the commission. ^{Footnote 153}

Zhou’s proposed rule on state responsibility was as follows:

Zhou strongly urged his colleagues in the League to prohibit states from conducting coercive military measures against other states in response to damage caused to the person or property of aliens. He firmly believed in settling international disputes by ‘normal peaceful means’ and proposed an incremental approach towards dispute settlement. Should states be unable to resolve differences between themselves, he argued that:

He believed that an international organization would serve to sufficiently check the conduct of states, and that such an approach was ‘not in the selfish interest of one or other state, but for the justice and peace of the world’. ^{Footnote 156}

In the second part, Zhou proposed 12 amendments to the preliminary draft report of the commission. Zhou made these propositions because states had abused the existing international law on state responsibility and used it to justify military action against the Qing government of China. Clarification on the rules on state responsibility was therefore important to prevent abuse and further encroachment upon Chinese sovereignty. There were two main types of amendments.

The first type related to the addition or deletion of words to prevent unduly expansive interpretations of the rules governing state responsibility – which often led to abuse. For example, he proposed the deletion of some words to make clear that ‘damage’ should not include individual moral suffering. ^{Footnote 157} He also proposed deletions to clarify that states should be prohibited from taking coercive measures against other states for injuries to aliens. ^{Footnote 158} Additions proposed include those which served to clarify that rights purported to be violated should only be those accorded ‘under international law or a bilateral treaty’. ^{Footnote 159} Some additions limited the scope of the rules to state actions ‘especially directed against foreigners’. ^{Footnote 160} It is clear that these amendments aimed to limit the ways in which international law might be abused to infringe a weak state’s sovereignty.

The second type of proposed amendments attempted to delineate situations when a state would not be responsible for an individual’s actions. Zhou proposed to add the following sentence to the draft report: ‘The state is no longer liable when the acts of the aforementioned officials were intended to safeguard the national security or sovereign rights of the state ‘in which damage was allegedly caused to the person or property of aliens.’ ^{Footnote 161} Zhou also proposed adding the word ‘superiors’ to replace ‘junior’ and qualify the scope of ‘officers’ for whose acts a state would be responsible. He reasoned that ‘junior officers were often outside the direct control of the state, and on many occasions non-commissioned officers joined forces with revolutionaries or rioters to suddenly provoke a riot which the state could not foresee’. ^{Footnote 162} A final illustration reflects how Zhou’s approach to the rules of state responsibility was influenced by his country’s humiliating experiences. China was, in the past, compelled by Western powers to apologize for injuries caused to aliens or their property. He argued that this was unjustified:

In addition, Zhou was a fierce advocate for limiting the doctrine of attribution, such that certain circumstances would warrant the total exclusion of state responsibility. He advocated this rule with forcefulness and clarity:

The commission’s study came to a successful conclusion and Zhou’s contributions were important. As Leo Strisower pointed out, ‘it was above all Mr Tchéou-Wei who, in eloquent language, attached great weight to this question’. ^{Footnote 165} A careful examination of the Final Resolution adopted in Lausanne in 1927 reveals that Zhou’s proposals had an impact on the final resolution adopted by the Institute. Article 7 is reminiscent of his suggestion that damage suffered by foreigners cannot be attributed to the state where military revolution has suddenly broken out or where a civil war has lasted for some time – because the state cannot be said to have breached its international obligations. ^{Footnote 166} The Final Statement reflects his advocacy work for peaceful dispute resolution and the prevention of war. ^{Footnote 167}

Zhou Wei’s success in advocating for Chinese interests made him a trailblazer for Chinese international lawyers who came after him wishing to do the same. On the centenary of his election to the Institute, ^{Footnote 168} it is all more appropriate to remember his contributions to international law.

8. Conclusion

A little over a century ago, while the world was still in the hellish throes of the First World War, Zhou Wei’s vision for lasting world peace seemed undoubtedly ambitious. It was, admittedly, not a goal that could be achieved immediately; ‘[n]o one, unfortunately, can foresee when this magnificent goal can be achieved’, he said. ^{Footnote 169} In his view, this goal was, and still is, a work in progress whereby all stakeholders in the ‘fraternal confederation of peoples’ must play a part. ^{Footnote 170}

Unfortunately, the League of Nations established in the aftermath of the First World War ultimately failed to prevent the Second World War and its tragedies. China fell victim to Japanese aggression while Zhou was still employed by the Chinese government. One must imagine him painfully disillusioned by the carnage and suffering inflicted upon his homeland and fellow compatriots.

The achievements of Chinese legal scholars and diplomats like Zhou Wei must be commended given the difficult racial, cultural, linguistic barriers they had to surmount at a time when considerations of representation in international organizations were still not given much weight. By demonstrating academic and professional achievements on a par with their Western counterparts, together with legal knowledge and advocacy skills obtained at top institutions of higher learning in the West, scholars such as Zhou were able to further China’s sovereign rights and promote peace and justice using international law. This was despite the Eurocentric world order under which they operated and why figures like Zhou should not be forgotten. By recovering the unique, previously neglected, and nuanced experiences of a Chinese international lawyer in the early part of the twentieth century, this article hopes to broaden our understanding of international legal history and inspire further research into the experiences of the pioneer generation of international lawyers from Asia.