A while back I wrote a sort post on the violent political economy of rare earth elements, also known as REE's. A recent Congressional Research Service report (.pdf is here) describes the central (and until recently under-reported) role of REE's in the modern economy and national security infrastructure: Some of the major end uses for rare earth elements include use in automotive...
In its motion to dismiss the ACLU/CCR lawsuit, the government argues that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the lawsuit on al-Aulaqi's behalf, because al-Aulaqi has the option of surrendering to the government and bringing the lawsuit himself: Defendants state that if Anwar al-Aulaqi were to surrender or otherwise present himself to the proper authorities in a peaceful and appropriate manner,...
Ben Wittes at Lawfare and Adam Serwer at TAPPED traded posts today on the government's motion to dismiss the ACLU/CCR lawsuit. I think the exchange -- particularly Wittes' response to Serwer -- illustrates perfectly why discussions about national security between conservatives and progressives always seem to have a Pinteresque quality. Here is the point to which Wittes responded: I think it's...
The Obama administration recently filed its motion to dismiss the ACLU/CCR lawsuit that seeks to enjoin the government from using lethal force against Anwar al-Aulaqi. Predictably, the motion relies on a potpourri of reasons why no court should ever review the lawfulness of Obama's determination that an American citizen abroad should be summarily executed, including everyone's favorite "state secrets" privilege. ...
Bobby Chesney has graciously responded at Lawfare to my post about detention in non-international armed confilct (NIAC). Unfortunately, I think Chesney's response not only misconstrues what Steve Vladeck and I have been arguing, but also demonstrates some important misconceptions about IHL. To begin with, we need to understand exactly what we are arguing about. As Steve pointed out in one of...
Steve Vladeck has been having a fascinating debate with Ben Wittes and Bobby Chesney about the merits -- or lack thereof -- of Sen. Lindsey Graham's proposed "Terrorist Detention Review Reform Act," which Wittes and Chesney support and Steve opposes. Steve doesn't need my help in the debate, which I think he's clearly winning. But I couldn't let one point...
Ben Wittes has a post at Lawfare today discussing ways in which the Obama administration might be able to avoid litigating the ACLU/CCR lawsuit challenging Al-Aulaqi's targeting. One of his preferred responses is the "political question" doctrine; in his view, "enemy targeting" is a classic example of a political question with which the judiciary should not interfere. I would not be...
Something that our European readers have already probably heard as it is one of the most viewed stories on the BBC website (but not so much here in the U.S.), the Basque separatist terrorist organization ETA has renounced (at least for now) the use of violence: Armed Basque separatist group Eta says it will not carry out "armed actions" in its campaign for...
Next week the ICJ will have oral proceedings in the case Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation). The .pdf of the press release is here. As far as I can tell, unlike in the Kosovo proceedings, there will not be an internet simulcast. (The Kosovo simulcast was very...
I have no desire to have the final word with Ken. But I would like answers to two questions. First, where does Melzer or the ICRC say that armed conflict is a geographically-bounded concept, such that a participant in an armed conflict ceases to be targetable as soon as he leaves the battlefield? I cited pages in Melzer's book on targeted...
I've got a new draft article on cyberthreats (you can download it at SSRN here). I'd planned to wait before blogging about it, but events have overtaken my plans since Orin Kerr and Dave Hoffman are already discussing my ideas over at Concurring Opinions. So, let me offer some responses to their questions here, and in the process explain (a) why some...
I have no idea why Ken posted his thoughts on the Washington Post editorial only at Volokh Conspiracy, but I wanted to respond to his post, because I think it is based on a critical misapprehension of the laws of war. Here are the relevant paragraphs (my emphasis): [G]oing to the geographic definition of war as a legal concept. This idea...
