04 September 2026
Thinking Constructively Together
Thank you to Kostia Gorobets and Andrea Carcano for convening this symposium and to all the contributors, who so thoughtfully responded to my piece. Though I cannot do justice in this reply to all the excellent points they raise, I want to draw on a few threads. The sovereigntist theory is bad because it is confused. It defines too narrowly and ultimately misrepresents what international law (in practice) is, what international law (in practice) does, and why international law (as a practice) can be worthwhile. Continue reading >>
0 
04 September 2026
“All the World’s a Stage”
When I started thinking about my response, I was tempted to do justice to the richness of the arguments. However, I resisted this temptation for a very practical reason. In a short post like this one, my argument would become a bit like the law in Hakimi’s metaphor: a bramble bush reaching out in all directions without a clear authorial voice to keep the story together. A nice metaphor for the life of law, but a bad model for a blog post. Therefore, I decided to do something that Hakimi hopefully pardons: I made a sovereigntist move, singled out one core point from her article and wove my arguments around it. Continue reading >>
0
03 September 2026
Translating Authority Into Action
During my academic life, which including my student days, spans almost 50 years, I engaged in trying to solve some of the complex riddles of what we call international law. How to relate international law as a legal system to the society it serves; what actually is the society it serves; and how does it respond to changes in that society? Where Monika Hakimi remains focused on theory, I probably lean more toward the possible impact of this on international law in practice. Continue reading >>
0
02 September 2026
Becoming the Sea People
Christopher Nolan’s long-awaited The Odyssey, released in mid-July, is already one of the most successful – and most controversial – films of 2026. The film retells the homecoming of Odysseus, king of Ithaca, after ten years of war at Troy. Odysseus was pivotal to that war, as he devised the famous Trojan horse that allowed the Greeks to enter and destroy the city. I suggest that the film can be read as a reflection on the current state of international law. I am aware that I am not the first to draw this parallel. In contrast to other contributions, however, I read the film from a European perspective as a parable about Europe’s place in a fraying international order and its responsibility to uphold the rules of public international law. Continue reading >>
0
01 July 2026
Dianne Otto
There is no doubt that Professor Dianne Otto is a giant of legal scholarship, a foundational figure in feminist international law, and a pioneering scholar of queer theory in international law. But more important than all of these achievements is that she is a woman of great integrity, fierce passion, and abundant hope and joy who has been an inspiration and role model to so many scholars who have come after her. I consider myself extremely lucky to be one of those scholars. Continue reading >>
0
09 April 2026
Three Lessons from the UN Declaration on Enslavement
On 25 March 2026, the United Nations General Assembly adopted, led by African and Caribbean states, the Declaration on the Trafficking of Enslaved Africans and Racialised Chattel Enslavement of Africans as the Gravest Crime Against Humanity. The Declaration can be read as operating within the language of foundational instruments of international law while simultaneously pushing their limits through a set of decisive doctrinal moves. Seen in this light, the Declaration offers at least three lessons for international law today. Continue reading >>
0
27 March 2026
Tyranny’s Useful Idiot
In the aftermath of the US-Israeli attack on Iran, the US and Israel attempted to portray the attack as the continuation of an ongoing conflict, self-defence, as well as a humanitarian effort. However, most international lawyers condemned the attack as “manifestly illegal”. In response, they argued that the illegality “must be weighed against the principle of reality”, “given the murderous nature of the Iranian regime”. This narrative characterises international law as tyranny’s useful idiot. In reality, it serves as a justification to abandon the law as a practice to legitimise political actions. Continue reading >>
0
17 March 2026
Condemning the Counterstrike Without the Cause
On 12 March 2026, the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution condemning Iran’s retaliatory strikes against Gulf states and Jordan, declaring them a “breach of international law and a serious threat to international peace and security.” While the resolution is silent on the ongoing US-Israeli bombing campaign, the larger problem is structural. Under the ius ad bellum framework the resolution purports to apply, the lawfulness of a use of force cannot be assessed in isolation from the use of force that preceded it. Continue reading >>
0
16 March 2026
Protecting Democracy Through International Law
While the 2023 presidential election marked a pro-democratic turning point for Guatemala, authoritarian forces continue to pressure the newly elected government to this day. In light of this, Guatemala’s pro-democratic government requested an advisory opinion on the protection of democracy and political rights from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. This week, from 17 to 20 March 2026, the IACtHR will convene the public hearings. I argue that Guatemala’s pro-democratic government turned to international law to generate resources for its domestic struggle against national authoritarian forces. Continue reading >>
0
12 March 2026
An Abdication of Legal and Historical Responsibility
There can be little doubt that the US and Israeli attacks on Iran contravene the prohibition on the use of force while Iran’s retaliation goes beyond what would be permissible under the right to self-defence. While the German government has criticised Iran’s violent crackdown on the demonstrations and was quick to denounce its retaliatory attacks across the region, no such condemnation has been forthcoming with respect to the US and Israel. This approach to international law is both hypocritical and an abdication of historical responsibility. It is also strategically short-sighted and dangerous. Continue reading >>
0