Principles of international justice: Kant, Rawls and the UN charter

It is proposed to single out the theory of international justice as a comprehensive research area located at the intersection of political science, jurisprudence and philosophy. As a prolegomena to such, the articles of the treaty on perpetual peace formulated by I. Kant, the principles of the law of peoples proposed by J. Rawls as well as the basic principles of international law enshrined in the UN Charter and other international documents are considered. A comparative and normative analysis of the three mentioned sets of principles of the international order is carried out, as well as their common and special features, advantages and disadvantages are revealed. It is concluded that the main ideas proposed by Kant and Rawls, as well as by current international law, are largely similar, and their differences are due to the different formulation of the issue (hence the different subjects to which the principles are applied, and the different subject of regulation). The thesis is expressed that the issues of justice at the international level relate to a wide variety of situations, therefore the theory of international justice should not be limited to either specific issues or set of subjects. At the same time, further research is proposed to be carried out on the basis of the “original position” and “reflexive equilibrium” methods proposed by Rawls, in isolation from any comprehensive doctrines, however, it is proposed to think parties involved in the development of the principles of international justice in the “original position” as individuals, not states.