What is "practicing public international law" like? "Practicing" in this field literally means that you must represent States against States – countries against countries – and not business corporations or individuals against States or State enterprises, which would be the "mixed" application of transnational law and would involve some, but not all, elements of public international law.

The issues would be questions arising under treaties, boundary and territorial disputes, maritime delimitations (i.e. drawing lines in the sea), other maritime claims and disputes under the law of the sea, and questions of State responsibility – all being in the nature of claims that can be brought by one State against another State. In many ways the law of the International Court of Justice is dominated by questions that at first appear to be primarily procedural in nature, but which emerge, at the end of the day, as questions relating to the substance of what makes public international law "tick" – the content of the consent of States to have matters adjudicated by a tribunal.

To represent a government of a sovereign State is a fascinating and complex task. Each government of every State is different, and one country can obviously be as different from another as clients can be. One must also never forget that governments are sui generis (that is to say, every government is unique). Moreover, they are Hydra-headed creatures, since all governments speak with several voices, and competing constituencies below the surface of the client representation must always be heeded.

The positive element in the field is that the work is, by definition, about as interesting as any legal work can be. To "practice" international law in international courts bears a number of similarities to "practicing" constitutional law in the U.S. federal courts: the issues tend to be fascinating; historical understanding is required; and the basic nub of the matter is the same in each – the power of the State – only in constitutional law it is the power (and responsibilities) of the State vis-à-vis its own citizens, and in international law it is the power (and responsibilities) of the State vis-à-vis other States. In international law there is also the clear issue of dealing with individual cultures, and States comprised of people with different cultures, against the international matrix forged by States acting together.

To "practice" public international law means either or both of two things: one becomes a learned legal advisor to a foreign government or one’s own government, or one becomes a counsel and advocate in cases in which that government is involved. This career path is one that is frequently taken by academic lawyers – with far greater regularity in Europe than in the United States.

The most common way in which an American lawyer would practice in this field would of course be if she or he represented her or his own government. This would mean working at the Department of Justice on international law matters, or, perhaps more likely, in the Office of the Legal Adviser in the U.S. Department of State.

It can safely be said that most U.S. international lawyers who have actually litigated questions of public international law have done so by representing the United States in either contentious or advisory proceedings before the International Court of Justice or, perhaps (where questions of public international law are involved) before the Iran/U.S. Claims Tribunal, also in the Hague. Only a few have been able to represent foreign States against foreign States. The undersigned has also been fortunate to represent a number of foreign governments in their claims under public international law against other governments, but has never represented the United States. Although I can say with gratitude to Providence that my work has been more than interesting, a career such as this, in the United States at least, is probably more of an anomaly than a model.

There is, therefore, no "general" career path to recommend, except that of entering the Legal Adviser’s Office in order to engage in public international law questions on behalf of the U.S. Government. Large international law firms will frequently represent foreign government-owned entities, and the young lawyer might find herself or himself suddenly charged with working on public international law issues in such a context, or even actually working as a junior member of a legal team representing a foreign government’s interests in negotiations or perhaps litigation of public international law questions – although it would probably be more likely than not that the other party in question would be U.S. interests and not other foreign States.

Certainly an academic career, if this is possible, would hold out substantial promise for future development if the young law professor were to become actively engaged in the teaching and research of public international law questions and, slowly but surely, were to render a small area of public international law her or his own area of expertise so that she or he might be likely to be called upon as an expert. In order to do this, of course, it is necessary to publish, and to publish repeatedly, hard and helpful analyses of particular public international law problems. The places to publish are obvious: the key contenders being The American Journal of International Law and British Yearbook of International Law, the International and Comparative Law Quarterly, and the Annuarie Francaise de Droit International Public.

If the young academic lawyer is lucky and talented enough, she or he can also "hit upon" a subject area which is really helpful to foreign legal advisors in their search for support on public international law questions. Such areas might well be: the law of the sea, maritime delimitation, the use of evidence in international tribunals, the law of damages and compensation, various aspects of procedural law, the "harder" or more useful elements of international environmental law, and so forth. Again, however, she or he should keep in mind that concentration is more important than ranging all over the lot; that a series of articles, notes, and book reviews within one area are likely to have cumulative weight that will result in earlier acknowledged expertise than if the young writer wanders from topic to topic. Most of all, you must find an area of public international law that really interests you, and follow it. If you have difficulty identifying such an area, you had better examine more closely what your basic commitment to the field really is, or whether it really does exist.

Once such a subject area has been determined, follow it. When a new case is decided that touches on it, write it up. When a new treaty is signed touching on that area, or national legislation comes to your attention that involves the area, write about it. Also, keep in mind that the area you select will doubtless have much to do with your future in actual practice. If you start writing about the Iran/U.S. Claims Tribunal, your expertise will be sought concerning that tribunal rather than the International Court of Justice. If you write about maritime delimitations, you will be sought out to help with the negotiation or litigation of maritime boundaries, but your name will not float to the top of a list when States are looking for counsel to deal with international trade issues.

It may well be possible to combine a career at the private bar – perhaps spending a number of years in U.S. government service for experience and seasoning – with an academic involvement. This would not be "tenure track" work unless the young law professor were to turn from law firm experience to a full – time law faculty experience, thus combining the two areas consecutively. It might well however be work of an adjunct nature – where the young or middle aged lawyer can keep her or his oar in the waters of public international law while still earning a respectable living and garnering useful experience at the private bar.

Public international law by its very nature is – like its cousin constitutional law – one of the more "academic" fields of the law. It is, therefore, almost impossible to achieve success in the first rank of public international lawyers without having made serious efforts to write, to teach, and to conduct research in the field. Most, if not all, members of the "invisible bar of the International Court" (the litigating arm of the "indivisible college of international lawyers" invented by Oscar Schacter) are also academics and have taught, if not all of the time, then at least for some of the time, in the field.

Words of advice now follow which will not be warmly received by an American audience. First, do not expect to achieve much before you are in your forties. The larger world, and this is the world that you will necessarily move in as a public international lawyer, or publicist, is not as forgiving to the young as is the United States. Partners in their late thirties may have been hot shots in the nineteen eighties, when leveraged buyouts and their legal fallout almost destroyed the integrity of the American law firm, but they will not be successful in a world arena such as international tribunals or arbitrations unless their ambition is perfectly accompanied by actual accomplishment, rather than the mere energies of youth. To quote Talleyrand: "Surtout, pas de zele." The unfortunate youth culture that is inculcated by the high salaries paid by law firms, and the concomitant self –confidence of young gunslinger partners, simply crashes and burns when applied internationally, where much greater store is laid by traditional values such as age, experience, hard work and knowledge. So, get them.

Second, do not even begin to hope for a distinguished career as a public international lawyer unless you have French (and Spanish) to a working degree of fluency. I might add that the use of standard English, and the ability to express oneself crisply and well in that language and not to sound like the common American conception of a lawyer, is also essential. (The unfortunate neologism of "attorney" is almost never heard beyond our shores, and one should surely avoid sounding like one.) French is the "other" official language of the International Court, and to seek to practice before the Court without being able, without interpretation, to follow oral arguments in French is a serious handicap. Above all, many of your international law colleagues will be French-speaking as well, and you will be unable to participate fully in the work of any international legal team unless you can understand what they are saying all the time. Spanish is not such an official language, but its widespread use and importance requires that you be able to at least read it without difficulty. If you do not have language ability, get it. If you do not know French or Spanish, learn them. You can (as I did) even go to night school for this purpose.

Third, do not expect that you will achieve the result of becoming a sought-after expert on international law issues if you bend your energies toward theorizing. There is always a time and a place for a theory, and too frequently lawyers proceed without thinking through the larger ramifications of what they are actually doing. However, it is all too easy, particularly in the field of public international law, to become infatuated with the role of being a pseudo-political scientist. Instruction of theory is all very well, and may in fact be a major contribution to learning, but it will not bring you any cases, since in fact it puts nothing on anyone’s table for them to seek you out for. Governments engage counsel for knowledge, experience, and advocacy skills, not for their excellence in creating models and constructs and paradigms.

This is particularly true, I fear, in the area of international law of the environment, where there is much emotional investment, particularly by the young and idealistic, but little "hard" law. Where there is hard law (for example, in the numerous anti-pollution conventions sponsored by the International Maritime Organization), it tends to be overlooked or even ignored, as being too technical, or even too narrow, by the legions of public spirited international legal environmentalists. It is important to press forward the environmental cause, and to be in search of global policies of sustainable development, but unless you deal with specific fields and specific answers to specific problems you will not be placing yourself in the category of someone whom a government will search out, retain, and pay for in order to do something specific.

The courses that someone interested in public international law should take in law school are, at a minimum, the basic courses in international law, the basic course in international organizations, and a third in a more specific area such as European Union Law, the law of the sea, and so forth. "Doing business abroad" is interesting and essential for training the mind to deal with transnational business problems, but it is not public international law and it never will be (nor should it pretend too be such).

Where will the field go in the future? The substance of international law can only, logically, grow exponentially. The public international law bar will also grow. There is no question that more and more governments will have more and more bright young lawyers from their own countries coming along who will become members of that bar. Does that mean that a U.S. trained lawyer will have less chance in the future? Hardly. First, there will be more work for all. Second, in any event there have always been proportionally fewer U.S. lawyers practicing in the field than, for example, English or French lawyers. U.S. lawyers will, I would hope, engage more and more seriously in public international law issues where they can represent "foreign" governments against "foreign" governments, and not merely just the United States government or U.S. interest.

If you are interested in public international law, you can – in the immortal advertising slogan of Nike – "Just do it!" It takes hard work, foreign languages, genuine sustaining interest, patience over years, and an academic turn of the mind. But if you have all of these, and keep actively writing in the field even if you cannot yet actually practice in it, some day your chance will come. Then, you will be able to start fitting public international law practice into your professional life, at least bit by bit. Although this fascinating field will probably never constitute 100% of your professional activity as an 
international lawyer, it may nonetheless offer itself to you with increasing frequency as 
your experience and abilities continue to grow.

* Visiting Professor of International Law, George Washington University Law School and Counsel, Curtis, Mallet–Prevost, Colt & Mosle, Washington D.C. Professor Highet has acted as counsel, advocate, or advisor in fifteen cases before the International Court of Justice over the last 33 years. He practiced law in New York City for 27 years and has been teaching international law since 1989. Professor Highet was President of the American Society of International Law from 1986-1988.

Published with permission from Careers in International Law by the American Society of International Law, Washington, D.C. This publication, which includes many other essays on a variety of practices in international law, is available in the NYLS Law Library's first floor reference area JX 1291.I58 1996 Ref.