What's Wrong With Not Apologizing: International Apologies and the Rule of Law

Abstract

International apologies, like domestic apologies, can serve a wide array of goals. They can express contrition, regret, empathy and care, reduce friction, and restore relationships. Of course, the realization of these goals depends, to a great extent, on the form and sincerity of the apology: how it is conveyed and how it is received. Importantly, however, and perhaps less dependent on the vagaries of any particular form of apology or its delivery, apologies also serve to reinforce underlying norms and expectations. An apology is a response to a failure to comply with generally accepted norms or meet legitimate expectations: Either the conduct, and/or its consequences, are to be avoided. Unlike most domestic law, international law recognizes apologies as a formal remedy for wrongdoing by states. Together with expressions of regret or acknowledgements of breaches, apologies are enumerated as a type of remedy known as" satisfaction." And, with the explicit recognition of apologies as remedies for wrongs, international law seems to bolster the role of apologies in reinforcing the underlying norms and expectations of international relations.