Use of Force

States must invest in “alternative” sites for atrocity prevention because “primary” sites such as the Security Council are foreclosed.

Introducing a collaboration with the Programme on International Peace and Security at the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict.

Marking the 22nd anniversary of 9/11, our new Symposium reflects on the enduring legacies of the "war on terror" and prospects for finally leaving the war path.

A close analysis of Israeli government statements on “proportionality” and civilian harm.

A Security Council resolution on funding AU missions risks not only peacekeeping but also UN human rights and civilian protection priorities.

Israel’s expanded use of AI in the war in Gaza may partially explain widespread civilian harm.

A plea for the equal application of international law to protect against atrocities in the Israel-Hamas War.

To reinvigorate US leadership, consider why US action on the 2008 Albright-Cohen blueprint has not translated into more success.

A response to an article published on how military campaigns can never be rendered disproportionate by the total harm inflicted on civilians.

Whether the magnitude of State responses to terror is ethical and wise goes beyond determinations of legal compliance.

States and international organizations must make the Responsibility to Protect a priority and integrate it into wider policy and programming.

The excesses of atrocity should not distract from the quieter, quotidian violence that started long before the 2023 Israel-Hamas War.