Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Self-Defense And The Limits Of Wmd Intelligence, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

During the 2008 presidential campaign, then-candidate Barack Obama stated: “Sometimes, the preventive use of force may be necessary, but rarely. The experience of Iraq underscores that often, perceived threats are not as real [as] they may seem, and our intelligence may be imperfect. But, when our intelligence is good and defensible we should not rule out the use of force.” This chapter examines ways of assessing legally whether that intelligence is sufficiently good and defensible. It argues that an objective reasonable necessity approach to WMD capability assessments can serve long-term peace and security objectives and, more specifically, how the law …

The Structure Of Terrorism Threats And The Laws Of War, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

This article considers a major debate in the American and European counterterrorism analytic community – whether the primary terrorist threat to the West is posed by hierarchical, centralized terrorist organizations operating from geographic safe havens, or by radicalized individuals conducting a loosely organized, ideologically common but operationally independent fight against western societies – and this debate’s implications for both jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Analysis of how the law of armed conflict might be evolving to deal with terrorism should engage in more nuanced and sophisticated examination of how terrorism threats are themselves evolving. Moreover, the merits of …

The Status Of Private Military Contractors Under International Humanitarian Law, Won Kidane

Faculty Articles

One of the serious problems that the new administration faces is undoubtedly the regulation and use of private military contractors in "the war on terror." The private military industry is largely unregulated at the national level. Its status under international law is also poorly understood. This article assesses the legal status of this industry, characterizes the various functions, demonstrates the difficulty of regulating the industry as a unitary entity, and identifies the appropriate set of international standards that the new administration and Congress as well as the larger international legal community could employ in evaluating regulatory options.

The Terrorism Bar To Asylum In Australia, Canada, The United Kingdom, And The United States: Transporting Best Practices, Won Kidane

Faculty Articles

The contemporary threat of terrorism that the Western world faces is primarily from so-called “aliens.” As such, the laws that are meant to combat terrorism necessarily involve the regulation of the admission and exclusion of aliens. This type of regulation is traditionally the purview of immigration law. Although the link between national security and immigration is by no means contemporary, the existing level of intersection between antiterrorism laws and immigration is essentially a post- 9/11 phenomenon.

The reason for this phenomenon is that the 9/11 attacks were planned and executed by aliens. Although there has not been a terrorist attack …

Katrina, Federalism, And Military Law Enforcement: A New Exception To The Posse Comitatus Act, Sean Mcgrane

Michigan Law Review

In the days following Hurricane Katrina, as lawlessness and violence spread throughout New Orleans, the White House considered invoking the Insurrection Act so that members of the U.S. military could legally perform law enforcement functions inside the flooded city. This Note contends that the White House's decision not to invoke the Act was substantially driven by federalism concerns-in particular, concerns about intruding on Louisiana's sovereignty. But, this Note further contends, in focusing so heavily on these state sovereignty concerns, the White House largely ignored the other side of the 'federalism coin "-namely, enabling the federal government to act where national …

American Airpower In The 21st Century: Reconciling Strategic Imperatives With Economic Realities, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

“Vexing” is certainly the right word to describe the state of resource allocation in the national security community. Despite still sizable defense budgets, serious economic constraints combine with a wide range of complicated threats to create extremely difficult choices for policy makers. To help them work through the decision-making process, Congress mandates Quadrennial Defense Reviews (QDRs). QDRs “are intended to guide the services in making resource allocation decisions when developing future budgets.” The 2010 QDR rightly insists that “America’s interests and role in the world require armed forces with unmatched capabilities.”6 Recent resource decisions, however, do not provide much comfort …

Why Do States That Oppose Nuclear Proliferation Resist New Nonproliferation Obligations?: Three Logics Of Nonproliferation Decision-Making, Andrew Grotto

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

Why do states that oppose nuclear proliferation resist initiatives to strengthen the nonproliferation regime? There is virtually universal support for the basic principle of nonproliferation - all countries but four are states-party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Yet enthusiasm among NPT parties for proposals to strengthen the nonproliferation regime varies widely even as new challenges highlight dangerous gaps in the regime.

There is something approaching consensus among scholars and policy-makers that many states resist proposals to strengthen the nonproliferation end of the NPT bargain largely because America and other nuclear-weapon states haven't made satisfactory progress towards nuclear disarmament. I suggest …

Opting Out Of The Law Of War: Comments On 'Withdrawing From International Custom', David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This paper is a response to Curtis A. Bradley & Mitu Gulati, Withdrawing from International Custom, 120 Yale LJ 202 (2010), which argues against the "Mandatory View" (according to which states are bound by customary international law with no possibility of opting out), and in favor of a "Default View" which permits states to opt out of international custom unilaterally. My response offers the following arguments: (1) Currently, the most significant contested issue about customary international law in U.S. discourse concerns the laws of war -- a topic that Bradley and Gulati treat only briefly and incidentally. Their proposal would …