To add to this: indeed, before critiquing Chimni's work at least pretend to have read it. Chimni criticises all countries, including India, because he critiques what he calls the exploitation by the 'transnational capitalist class' (TCC) of the subaltern.
Chacha does not know international investment law is undergoing a sea change (scrapping of treaties and backlash against investor-state dispute settlement) supported by TWAIL research and viewpoints. Chacha does not know the common but differentiated responsibility in international environmental law is being pushed in international agreements because of TWAIL research and viewpoints. Chacha also does not know corporate responsibility for international law is now inevitable supported by TWAIL research and viewpoints.
To claim that Chimni's work lacks relevance today is only to reveal one's colossal ignorance. Of course, your last statement is nothing but whataboutery. You would have known the answer had you really followed and understood the work and approaches of TWAIL scholars.
Absolutely spot on. It’s a Marxist school of thought with very impractical views (much like Marxism itself). I resect Prof RP Anand and Prof BA Chimni, who are among its founders, but they harbour a Leftist JNU viewpoint which is obsolete and irrelevant in today’s age. May I also add that TWAIL’s supposed conscience is only awakened in the case of US imperialism and not Chinese imperialism?
Have been researching a lot about TWAIL scholars and literature. Is it still relevant in the modern day ? Or has it becomes a niche that people tolerate as it's own thing ?
Could you explain this point in context of environmental law ? Just curious
Chacha, this is not 1950s international law.
In terms of practical implications: nil