This week was the official publication of my new book, The Poseidon Project, by Oxford University Press. A brief thread on my central argument: via
@amazon
Brazil's star turn on the UN Security Council is a good reminder that it was one of the few countries given serious consideration for permanent membership during the 1943-44 negotiations about the shape of the UN.
A few thoughts on Bolton: He is not a neoconservative. He has little interest in exporting democracy or human rights or in restructuring other societies. He supported the Iraq War but his preference was to withdraw soon after Saddam was ousted rather than engage in nationbuildlng
@vali_nasr
The letter is a bit unhinged to be honest; I think this will do more to confirm Israel's sense that the UN bureaucracy is stacked against it than anything else.
But none of this changes the main focus of concern: his willingness to use military force to dismantle nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran. Bolton is a conviction player, and there's no reason to think his rhetoric on this is hollow.
My next book--a diplomatic history of ocean governance and the law of the sea--has been freed from the Suez Canal of my laptop and is now sailing steadily toward port.
I had the opportunity to speak with a veteran war crimes prosecutor recently and (with their permission) I’m sharing some of their thoughts about the Ukraine investigation, and war crimes investigations generally:
In a weird way, Bolton takes international law and its effects very seriously. It's precisely because he believes international law is powerful (particularly in democratic societies) that he spent so much time and effort opposing the International Criminal Court.
He is deeply skeptical of certain multilateral institutions, which he believes tend to obscure the realities of power, but he does not believe the United States should abandon treaty commitments, including its commitments to NATO allies.
One fascinating relationship to watch will be Bolton-Haley. Bolton knows UN processes inside and out and might be expected to have a heavy hand in terms of managing diplomacy in New York.
But Bolton is not averse to some forms of multilateralism. During his time at the State Department in the George W. Bush administration, he worked hard on establishing the Proliferation Security Initiative, a multilateral partnership that has been reasonably successful
On the ICC, Bolton can even claim a certain prescience. Many ICC supporters said his concerns about the court eventually targeting the United States were absurd. But we're now on the cusp of an investigation that will include US conduct in Afghanistan and at certain 'black sites'
As UN ambassador, he labored over and took great pride in Security Council resolutions that he helped design. He sees little value in many UN processes but he has a grudging kind of respect for the Security Council itself, based as it is on the realities of international power
Watching the commentary on the Israel-Gaza conflict, I’m struck again by the divide between how the NGO and human rights community sees the laws of war and how national militaries view them.
In his speech today, President Biden endorsed reform of the United Nations Security Council in more detailed and fulsome terms than most recent U.S. presidents. Specifically, he argued for new permanent and elected members of the Council. (1/19)
But maybe the critical element in Bolton's long foreign policy resume is that he's never really been a principal. He worked at DOJ and USAID and then was an assistant secretary of state, an undersecretary, and UN ambassador (but not, if I remember correctly, in the cabinet).
I see this election largely as a referendum on U.S. policy toward the International Criminal Court. Pretty clear message from Florida that voters take ICC jurisdiction over US citizens seriously, but Michigan results suggest that sanctions against ICC personnel went too far.
As news of large-scale violence and likely atrocities emerge from Israel and Gaza, a reminder that the International Criminal Court has an ongoing investigation of the situation in Palestine.
@tradingPolitics
He might argue that we ended up with a vacuum/chaos anyway, so why not one with much less blood and treasure spent. For him removing dangerous leaders and their access to WMDs is focus. everything else (including wellbeing of people in affected countries) is secondary.
Longer Trump: after a rigorous analysis of the jus ad bellum and jus in bello criteria, doubts arose as to whether proposed Iran strike met either of their (distinct) proportionality tests. Review of well worn Aquinas texts confirmed doubts.
Britain's multilateral hot streak continues: the UK chairs the Security Council, holds the G7 presidency, and now a UK lawyer was just elected the next prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
The first UN Security Council resolution was passed on this day in 1946. (It contained only 144 words. It takes today's Security Council at least that many words to clear its collective throat.)
The news of countries providing additional funding to the International Criminal Court to conduct its Ukraine investigation is obviously welcome in many respects. But the ad hoc funding of particular investigations does raise some important questions.
Just saw a headline stating that NATO had promised to open global theaters by July 17. Intrigued, I read further. Turns out there is a National Association of Theater Owners (NATO).
I am given to understand that the new Top Gun movie features a preemptive military strike authorized by NATO (but not by the UN Security Council). I feel the need...the need for a jus ad bellum review.
The ICC prosecutor's decision not to open a full investigation of alleged British abuses in Iraq (dating from the aftermath of the US-led invasion) is an important one.
The Trump admin pulls out of another int'l agreement, the Open Skies treaty. NatSec Advisor O’Brien says “Trump has made clear that the US will not remain a party to int'l agreements that are being violated by the other parties and are no longer in America’s interests.
@anneapplebaum
@HotlineJosh
Are there ANY areas where Russian troops have actually been welcomed by the population? It seems that even in regions where Russia would have expected so there is strong opposition.
The issue of whether the United States will actively support the International Criminal Court’s investigation in Ukraine is nowr resurfacing as a significant one. A few thoughts about the debate and the overall context (channeling my inner realist/contrarian!)
Another important point about Bolton is that he has long seen the culture at the State Department as a problem. He sees the entrenched bureaucracy there as far too accommodationist and left-leaning. Now he's taking over as NSA at a time when State has been hollowed out.
I'm always amazed at how much losing a nonbinding, symbolic vote at the UN gets to some conservatives, who I think generally pride themselves on being more realistic and thick-skinned about these kinds of things.
This is great. Even better would be kicking the UN out of the United States. They can open their anti-Semitic organization somewhere else, and help the parking situation in NYC considerably.
The Security Council's Afghanistan resolution says nothing about the International Criminal Court's investigation of the situation there--or about international accountability generally
There are many consequences that Putin has to consider if he orders an invasion of Ukraine, but it's worth remembering that being charged criminally with aggression is not one of them.
South Africa’s Presidency confirms (by mutual agreement) that Russian President Vladimir Putin will NOT attend the BRICS summit in SA in August. Russian delegation to be led by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
Full statement here:
#sabcnews
One important dynamic to watch regarding atrocity investigations in Ukraine will be the relationship between the Ukrainian authorities and the International Criminal Court (1/15)
Happy 75th birthday to the United Nations. It has endured three times as long as its predecessor, and in that time there have been no sustained military conflicts between the permanent members of its Security Council.
@GerardAraud
There's truth to this but growing Chinese influence is also a simple byproduct of its stunning growth in last several decades. By dint of that growth, China has climbed the ranks in terms of assessed contributions and its voice naturally is louder in multilateral fora.
Russia tried this after Kosovo intervention as well. I'm not sure why. A robust vote against Russian resolution ends up backhandedly bolstering the case for the legitimacy of strikes.
#Russia
proposes draft
#UNSC
resolution that would condemn "the aggression against
#Syria
by the U.S. and its allies in violation of international law and the U.N. Charter." If put to vote, unlikely to get nine votes needed to force a veto by
#US
,
#France
,
#UK
, say diplomats.
I got into trouble yesterday joking about the Kellogg-Briand Pact. But a serious question: is it generally viewed as having been superseded by the UN Charter and therefore without legal relevance today? It's rare to hear it referenced in discussions on legality of use of force
From the White House plan for Mideast peace: the Palestinians "shall dismiss all pending actions, against the State of Israel, the United States and any of their citizens before the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, and all other tribunals"
@julianborger
Two things about this are true: 1) the US stance is mind-bogglingly inane; and 2) even if passed, the resolution was very unlikely to have any real-world impact
I think contemporary accounts of the UN's founding tend to overemphasize human rights and deemphasize the UN Charter's focus on militarily crushing any new aggressive powers.
75 years ago on Friday, the
@UN
Charter was first signed, underscoring:
👉🏿Human Rights
👉🏽Equality + Dignity
👉🏻International Law
👉🏾Peace
The ideals laid out then in are even more relevant today.
#CharterDay
#UN75Charter
As war crimes allegations mount in Ukraine, one important question will be to what extent International Criminal Court investigators are able to obtain actual testimony from Russian soldiers about what their orders and instructions were.
An ICC thought experiment: Put yourself in the position of a US official who strongly believes it is not legitimate for an international court that the US has not joined to criminally investigate or prosecute U.S. citizens. That will be harder for some than for others.
For those interested in the South China Sea,
@resplinodell
is very much worth following. At the moment, she's taking on all comers in arguing for a less confrontational US approach to the disputes there.
With all the attention to apartheid from
@amnesty
and
@hrw
it will be interesting to see if that term influences how the
@IntlCrimCourt
sees the potential crimes there
The Israeli government says it won’t cooperate with a UN investigation, citing, of course, “bias.” The real reason seems to be fear that the UN will condemn its crime against humanity of apartheid.
I'm planning to periodically feature new research on international organizations and global governance on my Multilateralist blog. Please give me a shout if you've got something coming out!
ICC prosecutor has just released full explanation of why she wants an investigation in Afghanistan, including certain US conduct there and in eastern Europe related to the Afghanistan conflict.
The kids were watching
@TheIncredibles
sequel the other night and I can't stop thinking about the ways in which the legalization of superheroes proceeded.
ICC pragmatism in Afghanistan: the court's new prosecutor wants to focus on Taliban and ISIS-K crimes and "deprioritise" other aspects of the investigation--including alleged US crimes