Military

Any acquisition of Greenland by the United States–whether by force or through coerced agreement–would directly violate fundamental principles of international law.

This hypothetical legal review imagines what a senior judge advocate’s legal analysis would be if ordered to plan a U.S. military operation in Greenland without Denmark's consent.

This is an Iranian uprising, and it is up to the people of Iran to decide their own future.

Trump’s threats to invade Greenland risk destroying NATO itself, but a little-known statute, 22 U.S.C. 1928f, could prevent him from doing just that.

Based on the publicly available information to date, it is difficult to sustain the lawfulness of the U.S.-led and UK-supported seizure of the Marinera.

The challenge is not recognition of Greenland’s importance; it is ensuring that security enhancements are strategic, sustainable, and allied-driven.

Would NATO have to defend Denmark if the United States attempted to seize Greenland? Article 5 suggests other allies are obligated to come to Denmark's defense if requested.

The last year of unauthorized military interventions and the president’s threats should spur Congress to reassert its constitutional prerogatives over the use of force.

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.

The rationale behind the Supreme Court’s decision in 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑚𝑝 𝑣. 𝐼𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑜𝑖𝑠 complicates Trump's remaining options for deploying federal military…

Previous Army privatization experiences demonstrate that the logic of Secretary Driscoll’s proposal to court private equity firms is difficult to defend.

Why did Maduro tell the judge he's still president? One reason: under international law, one country's sitting head of state can’t be prosecuted in another country’s courts.