Professor RP Anand analysed the birth of new states and their theoretical and functional inclusion in the post-UN world. The 1947 Indian independence afforded Indian lawyers a choice between Nehruvian internationalism and Judge Pal’s Tokyo dissent. Essentially, Anand preferred state interest over cultural differences as the currency of international law while celebrating the UN Charter, the International Court of Justice, and the UN Convention of the Law of Sea as the achievements of the mankind. Anand saw the rejection of international law as synonymous with power politics. While optimistic, his universalism engendered a Western anti-thesis that an Asian approach to international law, if any, was otiose. Subsequently, post-colonial scholars responded with a synthesis that brought colonialism from periphery to the centre of international legal theory.