Non-international Armed Conflict

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

A list of questions that should be answered by U.S. government officials regarding the lethal campaign against suspected drug trafficking individuals, groups, and vessels.

An expert Q&A on the Trump administration's lethal strikes against suspected drug trafficking boats on the high seas.

The two determinations are mutually exclusive; it is legally impossible to maintain both simultaneously.

The U.S. operations conducted to date against suspected members of drug cartels stretch the applicable international law rules and their interpretation beyond recognition.

The Trump administration’s “armed conflict” justification, however, is groundless.

The Pre-Trial Chamber's classification of armed conflicts in Gaza and its implications for the Court's jurisdiction.

Using amnesties, trials, and “parole boards” for detainees in northeast Syria would be consistent with the requirements of international law.

International law must better understand and account for the realities of civilian life in territory under armed group control.

"The classification of different armed conflicts in the report is not a simple interpretation of the relevant rules, but an interpretive choice."

Case studies reveal that Islamist rebel groups may be willing to comply with certain international humanitarian norms if linked to Sharia law.

While legislating is traditionally seen as a role of the State, armed groups impose “rebel law” over ~64 million people in contested regions.