by

Civil War’s aftermath & President Wilson’s views on U.S. entry into World War I

wilson_drawingAUGUSTA – Who would have guessed that this city at Georgia’s border with South Carolina, now best known as host to a premier golf tourney, used to be home for the boy who grew up to be the United States’ 1st global President?  Yet that’s what we discovered on driving through Augusta a few days ago: On a downtown corner amid a modern urban landscape stood 2 sturdy brick houses fronted by a plaque that declared “Boyhood Home of Woodrow Wilson.”

Our visit revealed that one house used to belong to the family of Joseph Lamar, who would become a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Next door wilson_homelived Lamar’s childhood friend, fellow preacher’s son, and fellow teammate on the neighborhood baseball team, “Tommy” Wilson. That is how the future President was known in the dozen years he lived in Augusta –  he even etched “T O M”, in cursive letters, on a downstairs window. It was not until adulthood that he would prefer his middle name, Woodrow.

Upstairs a bedroom featured boys’ twin beds, toys like a hobby horse and jacks, and drawings made by Tommy himself. Most interesting was the sketch at top, apparently drawn while looking out of a window in the upstairs drawing room. The foreground depicts the train, which trundled by at all hours. Behind the train lies the church where Rev. Wilson was a minister; behind it, wounded Union soldiers stream into the military hospital there in that post-Civil War, Reconstruction era. Some believe that the experience of watching those injured soldiers affected the boy –wilson_horse indeed, according to our guide, this childhood exposure to the tragic costs of armed conflict is said to have contributed to President Wilson’s reluctance to send U.S. troops into the 1st World War.

by

Call for papers on children & gun violence

The Section on Children and the Law of the American Association of Law Schools seeks a paper to fill out a panel on “Guns, Violence, and Children,” to be held as part of the AALS 2014 Annual Meeting, to be held January 2-5, 2014, in New York City. Organizers write:

letter‘Gun violence is a leading cause of death and injury to children, and continues to be a major risk factor to many children nationwide, whether at home or in their community. Twenty years separate the Columbine and Newtown tragedies, yet we are no closer to addressing the root causes of gun violence, particularly as it affects children. And potential causes, such as the impact of violent media and the accessibility of weapons, are hotly contested as illustrated by the recent Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Entertainment Merchant’s Ass’n and current Congressional debates over gun regulation. Nor do we adequately understand the impact on children of witnessing gun violence. This is particularly significant in the family violence context, where children too frequently experience trauma by witnessing violence between their parents or other intimate partners, and by being harmed themselves. Topics to be addressed include the potential causes and ways to prevent gun violence by and against children, as well as the impact on children of witnessing violence.’

Section Chair Jonathan Todres of Georgia State Law will moderate. Already confirmed are the following speakers: Sarah Buel, Arizona State Law; Martin Guggenheim, New York University Law; and Ronald Sullivan, Harvard Law. An additional speaker will be selected from among those who submit in response to the call for papers.

Deadline for submissions is August 15, 2013. E-mail Section Chair-Elect Cynthia Godsoe, Brooklyn Law, at cynthia.godsoe[at]brooklaw.edu, with “CFP submission” in the subject line.

(credit for detail for 13-year-old girl’s letter to President Barack Obama)

by

Ideas sought now for 2014 joint meeting of ASIL & International Law Association

Next April international lawyers will be treated to an unusual event: the 108th annual meeting of the D.C.-based American Society of International Law will be held jointly with the 76th Biennial Conference of the London-based International Law Association, which has branches in the United States (that is, the American Branch) and throughout the world. The event will take place April 7-12, 2014,  at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center, a block or so east of the White House; the conference hotel will be the J.W. Marriott nearby.

The theme for the event, “The Effectiveness of International Law,” is described in detail here.

Chairing the joint Program Committee will be Professors Oona Hathaway of Yale Law, Larry Johnson of Columbia Law, and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin of Minnesota Law. They’ve put out a call for session topic ideas. Here’s an excerpt:

asil_logoThe aim of the joint conference is to promote discussion of important topics by including a range of voices and perspectives. To this end, the Program Committee will draw on the submissions process as it identifies important topics and knowledgeable speakers. Drawing on members’ suggestions, the Program Committee will create a program with the following goals in mind:

1. Ensurimagesing coverage of a wide range of important topics of current interest.

2. Ensuring wide participation by individuals from a variety of backgrounds and perspectives (for example, to the extent possible, including in each session both academics and practitioners, both women and men, and those of different nationalities and perspectives).

Abila3. Ensuring a place in the program for some sessions organized by ASIL Interest Groups and ILA Committees or Study Groups.

4. Ensuring a vibrant exchange of ideas through the use of innovative program formats.

Deadline for suggestions for keynotes, roundtables, panels, New Voices sessions, etc., is soon – Friday, June 21 – and must be made via the online form available here.

by

Questions voiced as United Nations’ new Intervention Brigade assembles in Goma

gomaWith a U.N. Intervention Brigade in place and moving toward operation-readiness in the next month, questions have surfaced regarding the legal status of the deployment.

More than 3,000 troops from Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa reportedly have assembled in Goma, in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (map credit) This Intervention Brigade, Melbourne Law Professor Bruce “Ossie” Oswald writes in a new ASIL Insight, is intended as the United Nations’ “first-ever ‘offensive’ combat force.” By dint of Security Council Resolution 2098 (March 28, 2013), the Brigade has been authorized “to undertake military operations against armed groups” in order to “help the Congolese Government strengthen its control over territory.” As stated in ¶ 12(b) of Resolution 2098, the U.N. mission, MONUSCO, is authorized to support Congolese authorities, working unilaterally or together with Congolese armed forces,

‘taking full account of the need to protect civilians and mitigate risk before, during and after any military operation, [to] carry out targeted offensive operations through the Intervention Brigade …, in a robust, highly mobile and versatile manner and in strict compliance with international law, … to prevent the expansion of all armed groups, neutralize these groups, and to disarm them in order to contribute to the objective of reducing the threat posed by armed groups on state authority and civilian security in eastern DRC and to make space for stabilization activities; …’

(A little further into the resolution, ¶ 12(d), which makes no reference to the Intervention Brigade, authorizes MONUSCO to “[s]upport and work with the Government of the DRC to arrest and bring to justice those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the country, including through cooperation with States of the region and the ICC.” The International Criminal Court Situation in the Congo currently lists 1 at-large accused.)

Though some civil society groups were reported to support the Brigade, in recent weeks 19 nongovernmental organizations wrote U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to express concern about the relation between the Brigade and other activities in the region. In a followup interview, one organization stressed the need to keep any “military action” separate in order not to block humanitarian access to civilians.

Meanwhile, Oswald’s Insight unpacks numerous legal issues, though it offers no certain answers to them. He asks:

► Is the Brigade to be considered a party to the conflict, and if so, does that consideration extend to the entire U.N. mission in the country?

► What is meant by the Security Council’s grant to the Brigade of authority to “neutralize” armed groups?

That uncertainty gives rise to other questions. One such question jumps to mind on reading Oswald’s quotation of a 1999 Secretary-General’s Bulletin to the effect that if members of the Brigade are classified as combatants in the conflict,

‘they “can be legitimate targets for the extent of their participation in accordance with international humanitarian law”.’

Article 8(2)(b)(iii) of the Rome Statute authorizes the International Criminal Court to prosecute persons for the war crime of

‘[i]ntentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict ….’

Notably, the offense already has been charged in the court, in the Situation in Darfur, Sudan. Oswald’s reasoning suggests that in a different situation in some future case involving an entity like the new Brigade, that final proviso might require considerable interpretation.

by

Arms Trade Treaty topic of ASIL talk

srENFully 71 countries have signed the Arms Trade Treaty since it was opened for signature last week at the United Nations in New York. The United States is not among them: via State Department press release, Secretary of State John Kerry said:

‘The United States welcomes the opening of the Arms Trade Treaty for signature, and we look forward to signing it as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily.’

Interpretation of that statement no doubt will be a part of an upcoming, topical forum.

The American Society of International Law will host a lunchtime talk entitled “Arms Trade Treaty: Domestic and International Implications” from 12 noon-2 p.m. Eastern time next Monday, June 17, at Tillar House, its headquarters at 2223 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. If you’re unable to be present in person, you can watch it via live webstream.

As I’ve posted, the treaty emerged out of a final round of negotiations in March. At that point the United States was on board, but other countries balked, and so it fell to the U.N. General Assembly to adopt the text, available here.

On Monday speakers will discuss, in ASIL’s words, “a plethora of issues surrounding the Arms Trade Treaty such as the objectives and scope of the treaty, the rationale behind U.S. support for it, challenges to the implementation of the treaty, implications on the national legal system, and the international humanitarian law aspects of the treaty.” Scheduled are Thomas M. Countryman, the State Department’s Assistant Secretary for International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as representatives of 2 nongovernmental organizations that have worked for approval of the treaty: Andrea Harrison, Deputy Legal Advisor, Regional Delegation for the United States and Canada, International Committee of the Red Cross, and Scott Stedjan, Senior Policy Advisor for Humanitarian Response, Oxfam America. Moderating will be Professor David Koplow, Director of the Center for Applied Legal Studies at Georgetown Law.asil_logo

Registration and details here.

by

At renovated Rijksmuseum, an account of centuries of Dutch globalization

shipsAMSTERDAM – Newly reopened following a 10-year renovation, the Rijksmuseum now tells tales of globalization. It is thus far different and more provocative than the art-house of old.

A gallery named “The Netherlands Overseas” confronts visitors with the reach of the Dutch, who established the multinational Dutch East India Co. in 1602 and ranged widely for centuries thereafter. Adorning the gallery’s walls are portraits of Dutch ambassadors. One rides horses with a pasha in Persia. Another poses in Jakarta with his half-Japanese wife. In showcases below, an array of artifacts – the blue and white porcelain renowned in China and Delft alike, woolen caps worn by Dutch whalers, silverware that once held coffee, tobacco, spices, and spirits.

Throughout the museum Java and Molucca, India and Australia, Suriname and Brazil, North and West Africa, even Norway and Sweden, are invoked. Colonization is evident, not the least in the depictions of servants, some named, some not, beside the Lowlands envoys. Also present is international law, with major treaties marked by medals and epic paintings. Marked by the rijks_camp2013roomful of model ships above, moreover, is the warfare once conducted in the name of commerce and colonialism.

It is in the 20th C. gallery atop the museum that visitors encounter another sobering aspect of world events. The striped jacket at right once was worn by Isabel Wachenheimer, a 16-year-old German whose Jewish family had sought refuge in Rotterdam from the Nazis. After the Netherlands was occupied, all  were deported to Auschwitz, where her parents perished. She would be liberated at Mauthausen, a concentration camp in Austria where a fifth of the inmates were teenagers. Isabel, who became a U.S. citizen in the ’60s, kept her Mauthausen jacket. It’s described in museumspeak as “Germany, after 1938. Rags printed with blue ink, plastic.”

by

In lovely Sicily, specialists discuss globalization & international criminal law

duomoSIRACUSA – For the 13th year in a row, this 2,700-year-old Sicilian city is playing host to a Specialization Course in International Criminal Law for Young Penalists. A hundred practitioners and scholars from around the world are considering sessions on the theme of “The Future of International Criminal Law in the Era of Globalization.” It’s my honor to join more than 2 dozen colleagues as a faculty member.

Sessions in the initial days of this 10-day course have provoked much thought, many questions, from attendees and presenters alike. This morning and last began with a lecture from our host, M. Cherif Bassiouni, Emeritus Professor at Chicago’s DePaul Law and President of ISISC, the Siracusa-based Istituto Superiore Internazionale di Scienze Criminali/International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Sciences. He voiced concern for civilian victims of armed conflict,  and sounded concern that international criminal law may be too fragmented. With so many legal regimes and institutions at play, he said, what vans1is called a system of international criminal justice has troubling working in fact like a system. This in turn may weaken the normative core common to these enterprises. Exploring these issues yesterday were, as depicted above, Larissa van den Herik, Elies van Sliedregt, and Beth Van Schaack.

Today William A. Schabas and I offered our thoughts. Among many other points, Bill delved deeper into the character of our global society, citing Harvard Psychologist Steven Pinker’s 2011 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Meanwhile, I highlighted some positive effects that the multiplicity of regimes and institutions may have. To name 2:

► As demonstrated in external responses to the United States’ 2002 establishment of an indefinite detention center at its military base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the presence of many sites for adjudication or other challenge to a state’s practice may compel a state to adjust; in contrast, if there is only one such legal regime or institution, a state more easily may circumvent its strictures. (A notable aside: back in D.C., President Barack Obama is slated to talk about GTMO in a policy address this Thursday afternoon.)

► As demonstrated by the fits-and-starts history of international criminal justice, it seems unlikely that policymakers will design a perfect institution on the 1st try. Inspired by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ description of experimentation within the “laboratory” of the subnational state as “one of the happy incidents of the federal system,” I observed that simultaneous operation of multiple institutions might make it easier for each institution to learn, and adjust, from the lessons of the others.

The sessions continued with a fascinating exploration of commissions of inquiry, with speakers including 3 experts who’ve served on such commissions, Christine Chinkin, Serge Brammertz, and Philippe Kirsch. Up tomorrow is a survey of tribunals other than the International Criminal Court. Then more as the week goes by…not to mention much opportunity to enjoy the beauty of this ancient city.sunset