In his influential book, Straight Talk on Trade, Dani Rodrik provides a cogent critique of the existing international economic order and concludes as follows: ‘So, I accept that nation-states are a source of disintegration for the global economy ’ This article critically engages with the idea that the nation-state is a legitimate force of disintegration of the international economic order, with particular attention to trade and investment agreements In times of raising authoritarianism, it is crucial to reflect on some of the limits of the nation-state and on the necessity to develop alternative paradigms for integrating economies and societies Against this background, this article posits that we should beware of the risk of a ‘Schmittean moment’ This term is used to refer to a major shift toward an ideal of unfettered national sovereignty as the chief paradigm to re-orient the international (economic) order Under such ideal, any international normative benchmark is brushed away by an allegedly more intellectually honest ‘political’ dimension, which can find its realization only in the decisionist state To understand the risk of a ‘Schmittean moment’ it is important to recognize that the move toward more nation-state is partly animated by some legitimate concerns over the existing international legal order, such as those underpinning the analysis by Dani Rodrik This article articulates a two-fold critique of the idea that an expansion of national sovereignty is going to achieve a better socio-economic world order per se The first critique is internal, showing that the nation-state does not possess intrinsic characteristics to facilitate democracy, equality, and sustainability The second is external and focuses on the necessity to look reflexively at the goals of the system of international economic law, to re-imagine it as capable to address questions of inequality and environmental degradation

中文翻译：

---

国际经济法与解体：谨防施密特时刻

Dani Rodrik 在他颇具影响力的著作《贸易直言不讳》中对现有的国际经济秩序提出了有说服力的批评，并得出如下结论：“因此，我接受民族国家是全球经济瓦解的根源”这篇文章批判性地参与了民族国家是国际经济秩序瓦解的合法力量，特别关注贸易和投资协议 在威权主义抬头的时代，反思民族国家的某些局限性和在此背景下，有必要为整合经济和社会制定替代范式，本文假设我们应该提防“施密特时刻”的风险 该术语用于指向不受约束的国家主权理想的重大转变，作为在这种理想下重新定位国际（经济）秩序的主要范式，任何国际规范性基准都被一个据称在智力上更诚实的“政治”维度擦掉，只有在决策主义国家才能实现它要了解“施密特时刻”的风险，重要的是要认识到向更多国家的转变-国家在一定程度上受到对现有国际法律秩序的一些合理担忧的激励，例如支持 Dani Rodrik 分析的那些文章 本文阐述了对扩大国家主权将实现更好的社会经济世界秩序的观点的双重批评 第一个批评是内部的，表明国家-国家不具备促进民主、平等和可持续性的内在特征 第二个是外部特征，侧重于反思国际经济法体系目标的必要性，重新设想它有能力解决不平等和环境恶化和可持续性 第二个是外部的，侧重于反思国际经济法体系目标的必要性，重新想象它有能力解决不平等和环境退化问题和可持续性 第二个是外部的，侧重于反思国际经济法体系目标的必要性，重新想象它有能力解决不平等和环境退化问题