| Summary/Abstract |
The climate and refugee crises, and of course a global pandemic, attest to the limits that an international order based on sovereign coexistence imposes on efforts to tackle global problems. Not only members of the global civil society, but also states invoke justice to overcome the limits imposed by sovereignty and to enable multilateral cooperation. But what counts as a just solution to global problems? This article shows a sharp North–South divide emerging when the South demands just and equitable solutions that are redistributive from North to South. As the North opposes redistribution, international lawyers and diplomats from the global South have devised legal strategies to circumvent opposition. Rather than appealing only to common goals and cosmopolitan theories demanding deep commitments from states to change the international order, developing countries have sought redistributive opportunities within existing international law. Using their sovereign entitlements, developing countries pursue a combative solidarity to obtain redistribution.
|