practice would have been useful, particularly in evaluating how their authority to interpret— and their agenda in applying—treaties differ from states (the authority and agenda of international courts is not, for example, that of a state party, even assuming both operate in good faith). That said, Nolte does recognize actors’ perceptions of treaties can change quickly and that we “may be facing another major crisis” (id.). He concludes with a call for more attention to treaties, asking if it is time to seek “stronger swords” or consider substitutes—“informal, specific, and short-term arrangements in an electronically accelerated and interconnected world” (pp. 236–37). Treaties and Their Practice is a significant and useful intervention in a field where treaty lawyers have long lived with myopia. It offers a welcome, nuanced, and broad-ranging evaluation on how international lawyers can—and should—evaluate treaties. Its ambit stretches well beyond the VCLT’s confines, without diminishing the importance of that canonical text. Nolte does not, however, overclaim; his case studies are not meant to be representative of all treaties, let alone a diagnosis of international law generally (p. 24).12 As such, he leaves room for diagnostic tools beyond treaty practice. Indeed, his closing suggestion that we evaluate alternatives to treaty-making hints at one such approach—comparing states’ use of treaties and political commitments.13 Alternatively, studying treaty functions would add another perspective for evaluating them. Nolte’s story of Ulysses, for example, gives value to “constrictive” agreements, restricting Ulysses’s (and states’) freedom of action. But Ulysses’s story did not end with the Sirens. He had other adventures that did not involve proscribing his own behavior, such as he and his crews’ innovative escapes to freedom (e.g., from the cyclops Polyphemus) or difficult decisions on limiting losses (e.g., in steering toward the monster Scylla to avoid Charybdis). In short, Treaties and Their Practice may mark the beginning of a longer odyssey for treaty lawyers. Ulysses’s odyssey ultimately brought him back home. Where this one takes us remains to be seen.

中文翻译：

---

伊斯兰法和国际法：和平解决争端。作者：艾米莉亚·贾斯汀娜·鲍威尔。纽约州纽约市：牛津大学出版社，2020 年。Pp。xiv, 314. 索引。

实践本来是有用的，特别是在评估它们解释条约的权力和他们适用的议程与国家有何不同（例如，国际法院的权力和议程不是一个缔约国的权力和议程，即使假设两者都在诚信）。话虽如此，Nolte 确实认识到参与者对条约的看法可以迅速改变，我们“可能面临另一场重大危机”（同上）。最后，他呼吁更多地关注条约，询问是否是时候寻求“更强大的剑”或考虑替代品——“电子加速和互联世界中的非正式、具体和短期安排”（第 236-37 页） ）。条约及其实践是条约律师长期受近视困扰的领域的一项重要且有用的干预措施。它提供了一个受欢迎的、细致入微的、以及关于国际律师如何——也应该——评估条约的广泛评估。它的范围远远超出了 VCLT 的范围，而不会削弱该规范文本的重要性。然而，Nolte 并没有夸大其词。他的案例研究并不意味着代表所有条约，更不用说对国际法的一般诊断（第 24 页）。12 因此，他为条约实践之外的诊断工具留出了空间。事实上，他关于我们评估条约制定替代方案的最后建议暗示了一种这样的方法——比较各国对条约的使用和政治承诺。13 或者，研究条约功能将为评估它们增加另一个视角。例如，诺尔特关于尤利西斯的故事赋予了“限制性”协议价值，限制了尤利西斯（和各州）的行动自由。但是尤利西斯的故事并没有随着塞壬的出现而结束。他还有其他不涉及禁止自己行为的冒险，例如他和他的船员创新的自由逃生（例如，从独眼巨人波吕斐摩斯）或限制损失的艰难决定（例如，转向怪物 Scylla 以避开 Charybdis ）。简而言之，条约及其实践可能标志着条约律师漫长旅程的开始。尤利西斯的奥德赛最终将他带回了家。这把我们带到哪里还有待观察。条约及其实践可能标志着条约律师漫长旅程的开始。尤利西斯的奥德赛最终将他带回了家。这把我们带到哪里还有待观察。条约及其实践可能标志着条约律师漫长旅程的开始。尤利西斯的奥德赛最终将他带回了家。这把我们带到哪里还有待观察。