Latest in International Law: LOAC
[I am happy to report that Lawfare once again is partnering with InterCross and EJILTalk! to present posts stemming from a summer roundtable at Oxford concerning international law and armed conflict.
Is the Turkish control of northern Syria a case of belligerent occupation? And, if so, what does this mean for Turkey and Syria?
The Department of Defense released an update to the 2015 Law of War Manual on Friday, July 22nd, revising language on the protection of journalists in conflict.
The DOD airstrike that may have killed Taliban leader Mullah Mansour is interesting, from a legal perspective, at many levels. From an international law perspective, as Marty Lederman explains here, it looks to be another example of action under color of the much-discussed unwilling/unable principle (unless of course there was consent from Pakistan and the denials in the public record are mere
To assess the legality of U.S. targeting, it is crucial to know where the PPG does and does not apply. Yet to date, as commentators have noted, no clear definition has been given for the term that provides the key to this issue.
US Central Command's report on the attack on a hospital at Kunduz demonstrates a tragedy of egregious errors, but it does not reveal a case for war crimes.
CENTCOM’s report on the airstrike on a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan will surely attract the attention of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Office of the Prosecutor (OTP).
State Department Legal Adviser Brian Egan's ASIL speech is materially different from the broad, unilateralist brush of the Bush doctrine of pre-emption and its associated policies of the non-application of the jus in bello and the global war on terror.
The final stage of the Obama administration’s normalization of once-controversial Bush-era doctrines related to war.
ETF operations across the Iraq-Syria border reignite questions about the legality of U.S. intervention in Syria under international law, and the US misses an opportunity to shape norms on the use of force against non-state actors by failing to offer a detailed international law argument.