by Eric Jensen, Carolyn Sharp | Apr 8, 2021
Non-State Commentaries: Law-Making or Law-Suggesting? What is the role of non-State commentaries with respect to understanding international law, and more specifically, the law of armed conflict? This question is surprisingly provocative—particularly with...
by Marco Sassòli | Feb 26, 2021
Is the Time for Law of War Treaty Commentaries Over? In two recent Articles of War posts, Sean Watts and Michael Meier criticized the Updated Commentary of Geneva Convention III. Rather than focusing on specific interpretations adopted or suggesting other...
by Lieber Institute | Feb 18, 2021
Experts Weigh in on Law of Armed Conflict Priorities Presidential transitions present natural opportunities to reconsider national priorities. With the inauguration of a new administration, we asked our Lieber Senior Fellows and Lieber Distinguished Scholar...
by Ronald Alcala | Feb 11, 2021
Opinio Juris and the Essential Role of States Scholars, jurists, and practitioners have increasingly come to rely on non-State expressions to explain the customary law of armed conflict. This trend is problematic because it runs counter to how customary...
by Michael W. Meier | Feb 3, 2021
The Updated GCIII Commentary: A Flawed Methodology? In June of 2020, as part of its ongoing multi-year effort, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) launched its updated Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention of 1949. The Commentary analyzes...
by Shane Reeves, Robert Lawless | Jan 27, 2021
Reexamining the Law of War for Great Power Competition The United States has shifted its national defense posture to focus on “the reemergence of long-term, strategic competition” with “revisionist powers”—namely China and Russia. The government is heavily...
