The Just Security Podcast

In recent decades, the international community has sought to address the particular harms that women and girls experience in war. International law now punishes sexual violence in armed conflict. And there’s the Women, Peace and Security agenda, which the U.N. Security Council launched in 2000 with Resolution 1325. That requires member States to consider impacts of conflict based on gender and to involve women more in all aspects of conflict prevention, management, and resolution. But while some harms rightly receive coverage and draw condemnation, other forms of violence are overlooked. In November 2023, the World Heath Organization estimated that there were 50,000 pregnant women in Gaza. Since the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack, it is estimated that nearly 20,000 babies have been born into the humanitarian catastrophe that has unfolded in the Gaza strip. Around the world – from Ukraine to Sudan to Gaza – violence experienced by pregnant civilians, women giving birth, nursing women, and women struggling to survive in the period after childbirth remains entirely at the sidelines of global political conversations. Joining the show to discuss what experts call “obstetric harms” faced by women and girls in armed conflict and the obligations of combatants in the face of these risks, is Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. Fionnuala is the former U.N. Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism, and a law professor at the University of Minnesota and at Queen’s University School of Law in Belfast, Northern Ireland. We’re honored to have her as an Executive Editor at Just Security. Show Notes: Fionnuala Ní Aoláin@NiAolainFViola Gienger@ViolaGiengerParas Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoveragecoverage

On April 17, 2024, NYU School of Law hosted a panel of experts to discuss whether a former President enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct that allegedly involved official acts during his tenure in office. The Supreme Court is considering that question in United States v. Trump and will hear oral argument in the case on April 25. The panel consisted of George Conway, a Contributing Writer at The Atlantic and Board President of the Society for the Rule of Law; Trevor Morrison the Eric M. and Laurie B. Roth Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus of NYU School of Law; and Kate Shaw a Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Andrew Weissmann, a Just Security Editor and Faculty Co-Director of the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law, moderated the discussion. Show Notes: George Conway@gtconway3dTrevor MorrisonKate Shaw@kateashaw1Andrew Weissmann@AWeissmann_coverage

Sudan and Gaza are teetering on the brink of man-made famine. In Sudan, fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the rival Rapid Support Forces has displaced more than 7 million people with 18 million people enduring acute food insecurity, and nearly 5 million of those suffering at emergency levels, according to the World Food Programme. In Gaza, Israel’s war against Hamas has left 1.1 million people, half the territory’s population, facing “catastrophic” food shortages, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification process. Using starvation as a method of warfare is a war crime. And while the most urgent need is for immediate access to food and humanitarian aid, the crises in Sudan and Gaza also raise important questions about how to hold those responsible for potential atrocities to account. Joining the show to discuss the situations in Gaza and Sudan, whether the parties to the conflict might be committing the war crime of starvation of civilians, and what might be done about it, is leading expert Tom Dannenbaum. Tom is an Associate Professor of International Law at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, where he is also Co-Director of the Center for International Law and Governance. Tom is a foremost expert on international humanitarian law, including: starvation of civilians, siege warfare directed at a civilian population, and accountability for these acts. Show Notes: Tom Dannenbaum@tomdannenbaumTess Bridgeman@bridgewriterParas Shah@pshah518articlearticlecoveragcoverage

Vladimir Putin recently claimed victory as Russia’s president despite extensive evidence that the “election” was illegitimate in a number of ways. His repression, including evidence of State-ordered assassinations and assassination attempts, and his manipulation of Russia’s legal systems and institutions seems to assure him power – and impunity. Putin’s efforts to consolidate that power have included eliminating most political opposition and civil society organizations and forcing independent media to shut down or move their operations into exile. The recent death of opposition leader Alexei Navalny in a remote prison camp exemplified the threats to anyone deemed critical of the Kremlin. The long arm of the Kremlin also extends far beyond its borders. In addition to the now decade-long war on Ukraine, which escalated into a full-scale invasion in February 2022, and military interventions in the Middle East and Africa, Russian exiles are also not immune from Putin’s wrath. Just Security's Washington Senior Editor Viola Gienger recently interviewed Gleb Bogush, a Russian lawyer and expert on international criminal law who fled Russia in 2022. Gleb is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Center of Excellence for International Courts of the University of Copenhagen. He is also a member of the Cologne-Bonn Academy in Exile (CBA). Before 20222, he was an Associate Professor of International Law at the Moscow State University and HSE University in Russia, also known as the Higher School of Economics. This conversation took place a day before the March 22 terrorist attack on a Moscow concert hall that killed more than 130 people. Show Notes: Gleb Bogush@gleb_bogushViola Gienger@ViolaGiengerParas Shah@pshah518coveragecoverage

Haiti’s crisis of gang violence and political dysfunction has been spiraling out of control. The number of reported homicides more than doubled last year to almost 4,800, and kidnappings soared to almost 2,500 cases. Sexual violence is rampant, and 313,000 Haitians have fled their homes. In recent weeks, the crisis has reached new heights. While de facto Prime Minister Ariel Henry was out of the country, the gangs took advantage and rampaged across the capital, Port-au-Prince. According to the United Nations, since the start of the year, the gangs have killed over 1,100 people and injured nearly 700 others. As the gangs roam freely, the United States and Caribbean countries – in a bloc called CARICOM – are trying to mediate a solution. The result thus far – though still unfolding – is that Henry has agreed to resign as soon as a transitional council of possibly 9 members is formed and an interim prime minister is chosen. But many questions remain about how that council and the interim prime minister will be appointed, which segments of Haitian society will be represented on it, and how a potential Kenyan-led international policing mission might go forward. Where does Haiti go from here? Joining the show to discuss the security situation in Haiti, and how policymakers in the region and around the world are addressing it, are Rosy Auguste Ducéna and Beatrice Lindstrom. Rosy is a human rights lawyer and Program Manager for the National Network for the Defense of Human Rights (RNDDH) in Haiti and has testified before the U.S. Congress. Bea is a Clinical Instructor and Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic. Prior to joining Harvard, she was the Legal Director of the Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti, which works to bring Haitian grassroots struggles for human rights to the international stage. Show Notes: Rosy Auguste Ducéna@AugusteRosyBeatrice Lindstrom@BeaLindstromViola Gienger@ViolaGiengerParas Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoverage

In the two years since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, the fighting has caused widespread horror and devastation. Over 10,000 civilians have been killed and more than half a million people injured. Still millions of others are internally displaced, seeking refuge abroad, or are in dire need of humanitarian assistance. The idea of war – and how to prevent it – was a central concern when 51 nations came together to form the United Nations over seven decades ago. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine poses deep challenges to the international rules-based order and raises complex questions of international law, not only for Ukraine, but for nations around the world. In partnership with the Ukrainian Association of International Law, which worked with other stakeholders such as the Ukrainian Bar Association, the American Society of International Law helped to convene a gathering of international lawyers in Lviv, Ukraine in December 2023. Lviv was home to three giants in the field of international law: Hersch Lauterpacht, Rafael Lemkin, and Louis Sohn. Lauterpacht developed the concept of crimes against humanity, Lemkin pioneered the term “genocide,” and pushed for the adoption of the U.N. Genocide Convention, and Sohn played a pivotal role in helping to conceptualize article 51 of the U.N. Charter on the right of self-defense. Many of those who gathered in Lviv are now sharing their reflections on the meeting in a Just Security symposium. Joining the show to discuss the symposium are four of its editors, Kateryna Busol, Olga Butkevych, Rebecca Hamilton, and Gregory Shaffer. Kateryna is a Ukrainian lawyer and an Associate Professor at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. Olga is President of the Ukrainian Association of International Law and Chaired Professor of Law at Kyiv’s National University of Taras Shevchenko. Rebecca is an Executive Editor at Just Security and a Professor of Law at American University, Washington College of Law. Greg is the Scott K Ginsburg Professor of International Law at Georgetown University Law Center and the President of the American Society of International Law. Show Notes: Kateryna Busol@KaterynaBusolOlga ButkevychRebecca Hamilton@bechamiltonGregory Shaffer@gregorycshafferParas Shah@pshah518symposiumPatryk I. Labuda@PILabudaarticlecoveragecoverage

On March 6, 2024, Just Security and the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law co-hosted an all-star panel of experts to discuss the issue of government “jawboning” – a practice of informal government efforts to persuade, or strong-arm, private platforms to change their content-moderation practices. Many aspects of jawboning remain unsettled but could come to a head later this month when the Supreme Court hears arguments in a case called Murthy v. Missouri on March 18. Murthy poses several questions that defy easy answer, driving at the heart of how we wish to construct and regulate what some consider to be the modern public square. The expert panel consists of Jameel Jaffer, the Executive Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and an Executive Editor at Just Security; Kathryn Ruemmler, the Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel of Goldman Sachs and former White House Counsel to President Barack Obama; and Colin Stretch, the Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary of Etsy and the former General Counsel of Facebook (now Meta). Just Security’s Co-Editor-in-Chief, Ryan Goodman, moderated the discussion. This NYU Law Forum was sponsored by the law firm Latham & Watkins. Show Notes: Jameel Jaffer@JameelJafferKathryn RuemmlerColin StretchRyan Goodman@rgoodlawReiss Center on Law and SecurityNYU School of Lawcoveragecoverage

On February 27, 2024, Just Security hosted a live event for the launch of Professor Barbara McQuade’s new book, Attack from Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America. Barbara is an Editor at Just Security and a Professor from Practice at the University of Michigan Law School. She joined NYU Professor of History and Italian Studies Ruth Ben-Ghiat for a conversation about the book followed by questions from the audience. Just Security’s Co-Editor-in-Chief, Ryan Goodman, introduced Barbara and Ruth. This event was co-sponsored with the NYU Institute for Public Knowledge and the American Constitution Society. Show Notes: Barbara McQuade@BarbMcQuadeRuth Ben-Ghiat(@ruthbenghiatRyan Goodman@rgoodlawNYU Institute for Public KnowledgeAmerican Constitution SocietyexcerptAttack from Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America Seven Stories Presscoveragecoverage

On Feb. 29, 2024, Just Security welcomed the Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines, to NYU School of Law for an event in celebration of Just Security’s 10th anniversary year. Just Security’s Co-Editors-in-Chief, Tess Bridgeman and Ryan Goodman, introduced Director Haines who delivered remarks regarding strategic declassification, the role of law, and transparency in the intelligence community. Director Haines then joined NYU School of Law Dean Troy McKenzie for a question and answer fireside chat. Show Notes: Avril HainesTroy McKenzieTess Bridgeman@bridgewriterRyan Goodman@rgoodlawJust SecurityReiss Center on Law and SecurityNYU School of Law

Late one evening in January 2013, a group of men carrying Kalashnikov rifles approached another man. Their faces were hidden behind balaclavas and they smelled of alcohol. It was the height of the Syrian civil war, and the group of men were supporters of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. They arrested the man and handed him over to Syrian Air Force intelligence officials who detained and tortured him. A Dutch court recently convicted one of those masked men involved in the arrest, known in court papers as Mustafa A., of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The verdict is the first time that a Dutch court has convicted a defendant who supported Assad’s regime during the civil war, and it is the latest example of how courts across Europe are playing an active role in holding perpetrators of atrocity crimes to account. Joining the show to discuss the case and its implications are Fritz Streiff and Hope Rikkelman. Fritz and Hope work with The Nuhanovic Foundation, a nonprofit organization which helps to secure justice and reparations for civilian victims of war and conflict. The Foundation played an active role in this case. Show Notes: Fritz Streiff@fritz_streiffHope Rikkelman@HRikkelmanParas Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoveragecoverage

Vladimir Kara-Murza is one of Russia’s most famous political prisoners. He is a longtime opposition leader and prominent guest columnist for The Washington Post who was poisoned twice in incidents that are widely attributed to the Kremlin. And yet, like another famous opposition leader currently imprisoned in Russia, Alexei Navalny, Vladimir Kara-Murza was determined to return to his homeland to continue his human rights work after recovering from attempts on his life. In April 2022, Russian authorities arrested him and charged him with “high treason.” He was eventually sentenced to 25 years in prison. In late January, Vladimir’s wife, Evgenia, reported that he had been moved from his prison and that his whereabouts were unknown. Though he has now resurfaced at a new prison in Siberia, Vladimir is being held in the strictest form of isolation and his situation remains dire. In Russia and other repressive countries, the situation is also dire for the lawyers trying to defend those political prisoners. The lawyers often face threats to their lives or threats of prosecution themselves simply for doing their jobs. Joining the show to discuss Vladimir Kara-Murza’s case, and the broader risks facing political prisoners and lawyers in Russia, are Vladimir’s wife, Evgenia Kara-Murza, and his lawyer for more than 10 years, Vadim Prokhorov. Evgenia is Advocacy Director of the Free Russia Foundation and has tirelessly advocated for the rights of her husband and other political prisoners in Russia, and Vadim has represented a range of Kremlin critics who’ve been targeted by the regime, including opposition politicians and anti-corruption campaigners. He was forced to flee Russia last April, just days before Vladimir’s sentence was handed down, because the prosecutor and the judge in the case threatened to prosecute him, too. Show Notes: @ekaramurzaVadim Prokhorov@vkaramurzaViola Gienger@ViolaGiengerParas Shah@pshah518Free Russia FoundationJustice Defenders Programarticlecoveragecoverage

From products like ChatGPT to resource allocation and cancer diagnoses, artificial intelligence will impact nearly every part of our lives. We know the potential benefits of AI are enormous, but so are the risks, including chemical and bioweapons attacks, more effective disinformation campaigns, AI-enabled cyber-attacks, and lethal autonomous weapons systems. Policymakers have taken steps to address these risks, but industry and civil society leaders are warning that these efforts still fall short. Last year saw a flurry of efforts to regulate AI. In October, the Biden administration issued an executive order to encourage “responsible” AI development, in November, the U.K. hosted the world’s first global AI Safety Summit to explore how best to mitigate some of the greatest risks facing humanity, and in December European Union policymakers passed a deal imposing new transparency requirements on AI systems. Are efforts to regulate AI working? What else needs to be done? That’s the focus of our show today. It’s clear we are at an inflection point in AI governance – where innovation is outpacing regulation. But while States face a common problem in regulating AI, approaches differ and prospects for global cooperation appear limited. There is no better expert to navigate this terrain than Robert Trager, Senior Research Fellow at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government, Co-Director of the Oxford Martin AI Governance Initiative, and International Governance Lead at the Centre for the Governance of AI. Show Notes: Robert Trager@RobertTragerBrianna Rosen@rosen_brParas Shah@pshah518Symposiumcoveragecoverage

On Friday, January 26, the International Court of Justice issued its Opinion granting provisional measures in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel. At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court did not determine whether Israel’s conduct amounts to genocide – that potential determination is left for what is known as the “merits” phase of the case, which will likely occur years from now. Instead, today the Court held that Israel’s actions to minimize harm to civilians did not sufficiently remove the risk of irreparable harm and ordered Israel to take specific actions including refraining from acts under the Genocide Convention, preventing and punishing incitement to genocide and taking effective measures to allow for the provision of humanitarian assistance, among others. Joining the show to discuss the Court’s Opinion and its implications are law professors Adil Haque, Oona Hathaway, and Yuval Shany. They have each written extensively about the case and its potential impact, including on Just Security. Show Notes: Adil Ahmad Haque@AdHaque110Oona A. Hathaway@oonahathawayYuval Shany@yuvalshany1Paras Shah@pshah518South Africa v. Israelcoveragecoverage

This week, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders used a little-known, decades-old law to force the Senate to vote on whether to request an investigation of potential human rights abuses by Israel in its war against Hamas. The obscure process that Sanders used is known as Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act. The law allows Congress to request a mandatory human rights report from the State Department on a specified country. And if the State Department does not provide a report within 30 days of the request, U.S. security assistance to the target country stops. While the resolution ultimately failed on January 16, it shows that Section 502B has the potential to become a powerful tool for forcing public discussion about alleged human rights and the United States’ role in facilitating them. Joining the show to unpack how Section 502B works, along with its history and new efforts to use it, is John Chappell. John is an Advocacy & Legal Fellow at the Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC). He’s an expert on Section 502B. Show Notes: John Ramming Chappell@jwrchappellParas Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoveragecoverage

This year’s version of the U.N. climate meeting, or COP, concluded last week in the United Arab Emirates. Nearly 200 nations from around the world agreed to a historic deal to transition away from fossil fuels in a “just, orderly and equitable manner” and leaders pledged $700 million in funds to address the loss and damage from climate change. But as with any global agreement, now comes the hard part of turning words on paper into reality as countries decide how to implement their new commitments. Joining the show to discuss the developments at COP28 and what comes next is Mark Nevitt. Mark is a professor at Emory Law School and an expert on climate change. Show Notes: Paras Shah@pshah518Mark P. Nevitt@MarkNevittarticlecoveragecoverage

The 2024 U.S. presidential election is less than a year away and the primary process starts in January. The election will serve as a stress test for American democracy: Will candidates accept the results? Will voters? Are governments and social media platforms ready for a barrage of disinformation? And can election administrators maintain confidence in free and fair elections as they work with constantly shifting election laws, court rulings, and voter suppression efforts? Joining the show to discuss how election administrators are preparing for 2024 and the risks they are confronting now is Allison Mollenkamp. Allison is a Fellow at Just Security and recently interviewed election officials from eight states around the country. Show Notes: Paras Shah@pshah518Allison Mollenkamparticlecoverage

On Monday, Dec. 4, 2023, the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU Law and Just Security co-hosted an expert discussion entitled “Toward a Goldilocks Deal on Section 702 Surveillance Reform.” This Podcast episode is the audio from that discussion, which was co-moderated by Senior Counsel at Perkins Coie LLP and former Justice Department counterespionage prosecutor and FISA oversight attorney David Aaron and Just Security Co-Editor-in-Chief and former Deputy Legal Adviser to the National Security Council and Special Assistant to the President Tess Bridgeman. The panelists were: Elizabeth (Liza) Goitein the Senior Director of the Liberty & National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice; Andrew McCabe the Former Acting Director and Deputy Director at the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Mary McCord the Executive Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University Law Center. Show Notes: David Aaron@davidcaaronTess Bridgeman@bridgewriterElizabeth (Liza) Goitein@LizaGoiteinAndrew G. McCabeMary B. McCordParas Shah@pshah518coverageReiss Center on Law and Security

This week, world leaders, diplomats, climate activists, journalists, and fossil fuel executives will meet in Dubai for the United Nations’ annual Climate Change Conference. While many discussions will build on last year’s COP, where nations agreed to fund loss and damage from climate change, another focus will be on who is sidelined from the discussions. The United Arab Emirates has reportedly hired an army of public relations experts to help manage its reputation during the two-week event and to keep international attention away from its crackdown on civic space. Meanwhile, some of the world’s largest democracies, including governments that have traditionally championed human rights, lack a clear vision for protecting civic space in the climate talks, even though Indigenous communities, social justice movements, and human rights defenders are at the forefront of fighting climate change. Joining the show to discuss the role of civil society at COP 28 is Kirk Herbertson. Kirk is a Senior Policy Advisor at EarthRights International, a nonprofit organization that “combines the power of law with the power of people in defense of human rights and the environment.” Show Notes: Kirk Herbertson@KirkHerbertsonParas Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoverage

Some of the biggest risks to human rights in the twenty-first century come from governments misusing surveillance technology originally designed to combat counterterrorism. These spyware tools are manufactured around the world, including in the United States, the European Union, China, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates. The technology is difficult to detect and allows access to a target’s communications, contacts, and geolocation and metadata. It can even delete information or plant incriminating data on a person’s phone. Now, nations are using it to spy on politicians, journalists, human rights activists, lawyers, and ordinary citizens with no links to terrorism. As a reminder, this is Part 2 of a conversation with Fionnuala Ni Aoláin. Fionnuala recently completed her tenure as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism. For nearly six years, she examined global and country counterterrorism practices and how they do or don’t comply with human rights standards. To hear Part 1 of our discussion, including Fionnuala’s insights from her experience documenting the conditions at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in prisons and sprawling camps in Northeast Syria, please tune in to last week’s episode, which you can find in the show notes and on our website. Show Notes: Fionnuala Ní Aoláin@NiAolainFParas Shah@pshah518Viola Gienger@ViolaGiengerPart 1Symposiumcoveragecoveragewebsite

More than two decades after the 9/11 attacks, counterterrorism still dominates most security policies and practices around the world, including at the United Nations. And yet, the problem of terrorism persists around the world – from southwestern Pakistan, to the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, to the Sahel. Across the board, nations are failing to address the root causes of extremism. What might alternative approaches to counterterrorism look like? Perhaps no one is better equipped to consider the impact of counterterrorism on human rights than Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. This is Part 1 of a special two-part conversation. Please join us next week for Fionnuala’s insights into the human rights implications caused by spyware and personal data collection. Fionnuala recently completed her tenure as the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism. She was the first U.N. expert to visit the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and issued a landmark report on how Guantanamo deprives both the detainees and the 9/11 victims of the justice they all deserve. She assessed the conditions in prisons and camps in northeast Syria that still hold over 50,000 people more than 5 years after the defeat of the Islamic State. She raised awareness of the role of gender in counterterrorism and of the repressive effect of counterterrorism tactics on civil society, and she enumerated the ever-expanding counterterrorism mandate at the U.N. Fionnuala is a law professor at the University of Minnesota and at Queens University School of Law in Belfast, Northern Ireland and an executive editor at Just Security. Show Notes: Fionnuala Ní Aoláin@NiAolainFParas Shah@pshah518Viola Gienger@ViolaGiengerPart 2articleSymposiumcoveragecoveragecoveragewebsiteThe Guantánamo Artwork and Testimony