Category Archives: International Law

Military Justice

Military Justice: A Very Short Introduction (Book Review)

Eugene Fidell’s recently published book Military Justice: A Very Short Introduction fills an existing gap in academic military justice literature by providing readers with a condensed book focused solely on military justice. Fidell leverages his years of experience as both a practitioner and a scholar to bring us this “pint sized” book that covers topics ranging from the basics of military command to detention and military justice reform. Nevitt’s review of this “quick and easy military justice primer” makes it clear that readers from the newest law student to the most experience JAG could benefit from reading Fidell’s work.

preventative detention

Preventative Detention for National Security Purposes

By Dvir Saar & Ben Wahlhaus

Over the last few decades, democratic states have been forced to confront the threat of terrorism on multiple fronts: at home, at the borders, and abroad. One tool that states have employed to protect the population is preventative detention. Although highly effective in countering national security threats, preventative detention presents the risk of unjustified detention.

In this article, Saar and Wahlhaus use the Israeli experience as a lens to explore the efficacy of preventative detention against the backdrop of international law. The authors have conducted a comparative analysis between three different Israeli legal frameworks in an effort to inform other states that are attempting to strike the proper balance between national security and avoiding the risk of unjustified detention.

Iran Nuclear Deal

JCP-No-Way: A Critique of the Iran Nuclear Deal as a Non-Legally-Binding Political Commitment

David Jonas and Dyllan Taxman’s insightful article— “JCP-No-Way: A Critique Of The Iran Nuclear Deal As A Non-Legally-Binding Political Commitment” —examines the Iran Nuclear Deal and its place in prior US arms treaties.

By positioning the Iran Nuclear Deal within the historical context of past agreements, American treaty-making, and national and international political norms, the authors conclude that the use of a non-binding political commitment to rein in Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions was both novel and inappropriate.

Instead, the authors argue that the Obama Administration should have used one of the available legally binding agreement options when negotiating with Iran. While the Trump Administration has since withdrawn from the Iran Nuclear Deal, this article highlights the importance of the US prioritizing future arms agreements that carry the force of law.