In a new paper by the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, authors examine the actual and potential roles of silence in the identification and the development of international law, with a particular focus on jus ad bellum.
The bold conversation the U.S. public and officials ought to have now has a different focus.
It is clear that algorithmic warfare is developing now. Governments, industry, academia, and civil society should all be pursuing ways to secure war-algorithm accountability.
In Indefinite War: Unsettled International Law on the End of Armed Conflict, a new report for the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, we argue that international law, as it now stands, provides insufficient guidance to ascertain the end of many armed conflicts on factual, normative, and legal grounds.
A recently-published briefing report from the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, devises the new concept of "war algorithms" to describe any algorithm expressed in computer code, effectuated through a constructed system, and capable of operating in relation to armed conflict.
If It’s Broke, Don’t Make it Worse: A Critique of the U.N. Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism
The UN Secretary-General's Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism would seem to be the ambitious global agenda required to counter the "scourge of our times." But it suffers from a number of fatal flows.
What does Saudi Arabia's letter to the UN mean for organizations like Doctors Without Borders, as they contemplate humanitarian medical presence in conflicts such as Yemen?