So, About International Law

'The ICC is a fairly farcical organization.'

By
27

Jamie Weinstein begins his tenure as host of Monday Dispatch Podcasts with a discussion with Jeremy Rabkin. Rabkin, a professor of law at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, explains what exactly international law is and how it’s relevant (or irrelevant) to Israel’s war against Hamas.

-Law without Nations?: Why Constitutional Government Requires Sovereign States

-Rabkin’s profile at GMU

By
Comments (27)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    A good interview. Glad to have you aboard, Jamie.

    Collapse
  2. Sunilsaha2

    This article from March 2019 was eye opening.

    https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-to-hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-palestinians-divided-583082

    Collapse
    1. Sunilsaha2

      I am very curious about The Dispatch's take on the article and Netanyahu's past strategy with Gaza in particular.

      Collapse
  3. Brett F

    Interesting discussion although Professor Rabkin's bias in favor of Israel made it less useful than it could have been.

    Collapse
  4. Payette

    This was a very good discussion. The audio for Professor Rabkin was of a poor quality. Otherwise great.

    Collapse
  5. Jon Kirsch

    I found this to be very eye-opening and informative - and honestly I learned several surprising things here, including the Red Cross' role in WWII and how the Allies in WWII had to bend international law in order to win. I respectfully disagree with the comment that your guest should have delved into the specific International Law treaty language. I think that would have gotten you into the weeds, and for those of us who are not legal experts it would have made the interview lag.

    As for audio quality, although I could hear the host better than the guest, I had no trouble at all listening and understanding what he was saying. This was such a timely topic and I really do appreciate that you did this interview! In fact, my only complaint is that it wasn't a little longer, or closer to the 30-45 minute range.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Dina

    I found the audio quality of the professor to be so poor that I had a hard time following, gave up after a few minutes. The quality of Jamie’s audio was fine.

    I’m disappointed because I really wanted to hear this one!

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Jonathan

    This conversation was a bit legalistic and pedantic. And that’s fine such as it goes; I learned some things. I wish there had been a bit more attention paid to the way that int’l law, such as it is, is an attempt at establishing norms that make wars less inhumane to civilians. Obviously the point of war is to kill human beings and civilians necessarily die in them. But there is plenty of space to reduce suffering within that context.

    Collapse
  8. Pohl

    I listened to this last night, and the guest was very opinionated. He could have tried citing actual treaty language, which is available for many of the issues touched on here. I think it would have shed more light to have slowed your roll in this interview instead of letting it be punctuated by repeated You’re talking like international law exists! Meh.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Dennis.Sanders

      I agree. It was kind of a turn-off.

      Collapse
  9. John Matthew IV

    Sarah is correct. International Law is pretend.

    Thank you for the comprehensive explanation.

    And for the note about the Red Cross in the Second World War.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Wrob77

    So to sum up there is no such thing as international law.

    Collapse
    1. Pohl

      That would be the mistaken takeaway as presented here, yes. If someone wants to Google it, they would learn more from the first few search results.

      Collapse
Load More