International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

The relationship between international courts and States shapes how they provide accountability, build peace, and respond to backlash.

International courts rarely end wars, but when designed humbly, creatively, and fairly, they can help parties choose law over war—turning justice into a path toward peace.

This article examines how the ICJ and ICC navigate legitimacy challenges in armed conflicts, testing their authority, fairness, and impact on global peace and justice.

Judicial involvement in ongoing armed conflicts should be examined from multiple vantage points: courts, victims, parties to conflict, and broader goals of peace and security.

Did the Sept. 2 strike on suspected drug traffickers using an unmarked aircraft violate the prohibition on perfidy, or other LOAC rules, had there been an armed conflict?

Intelligence has a central role to play in capitalizing on the successful capture of Maduro and stabilizing post-Maduro Venezuela, demonstrating U.S. capabilities and resolve.

Expert FAQ on the U.S. military operations against Venezuela, high seas boat strikes, seizure of vessels and more.

What stories or topics merited more attention in 2025, and which might inform law and policy conversations in 2026?

Experts examine the international law basis of the U.S. boarding and seizure of a vessel carrying Venezuelan crude.

Operation Southern Spear’s lethal boat strikes are unlawful under IHRL and, even on the administration’s own terms, trigger binding LOAC and DoD duties to investigate.

Detailing how, under different scenarios, international law and U.S. past practices apply to Sept. 2 boat strike on survivors.

An amnesty in any future peace plan would be unlawful and a moral abdication of the pursuit of accountability for victims in Russia's war in Ukraine.