Weekend Roundup: June 3-9, 2019

Mohamed Helal kicked off the week with a two-part jus ad bellum analysis (here and here) of the United States’ possible legal justifications for going to war with Iran, in light of the Trump administration’s recent saber-rattling towards the regime. In particular, Mohamed addressed three possibilities: (1) preempting a nuclear Iran, (2) resisting Iranian regional policies and responding to “indirect” Iranian aggression, and (3) protecting naval operations in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.

Benjamin Nussberger continued Mohamed’s analysis of the current instability in the Middle East by discussing Saudi Arabia’s evolving use of legal language – most notably, attribution under ARSIWA – with respect to Iranian involvement in the war in Yemen, and how this “attribution narrative” could lead to a direct confrontation between the regional antagonists.

Kevin closed out the week with some important thoughts on the Afghanistan appeal, which he calls an appeal on “the most important decision in the ICC’s history.”

Thanks for reading and have a great week!