The Lawfare Project in the News

On June 28th, The Lawfare Project conducted a working group session on lawfare as part of a Conference on Legal Challenges in Israeli Policy and Advocacy held by the Israeli Consulate in New York, the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists. Attorney Jared Silverman attended the conference, and in a July 13th New Jersey Jewish News article entitled “If you want peace, prepare for Lawfare,” he succinctly captured lawfare’s shared implications for the United States and Israel, “Although Israel may have the dubious distinction of being number one in this arena, presenters consistently made the point that the United States is in the number two position and that Israel is the “canary in the mine” for the Western World.” Mr. Silverman also demonstrated the complexity of lawfare, and cited The Lawfare Project’s definition of the term. The article is available in its entirety here.

Lawfare News

The following recent articles will serve to illustrate how lawfare is continuing to manifest around the world.

Please note that third-party articles do not necessarily reflect the views of The Lawfare Project, and the inclusion of article summaries does not necessarily constitute endorsement of any views taken therein.

a. “Iran to prosecute 26 American officials, MP says”

On July 3rd, Shirzad Bozorgmehr reported for CNN.com that an Iranian Parliamentarian Esmaeel Kowsari has announced the prosecution of current and former American officials for supposed ‘human rights’ violations, thereby “potentially escalating a tit-for-tat dispute between the two countries.” The officials will be tried in absentia, and while Iranian courts have negligible credibility, Kowsari indicated that Iranian rulings would then be “referred to the relevant international tribunals,” which raises the possibility of a political show trial with actual consequences. Accordingly, while the Iranian trials themselves bear little consideration, subsequent Iranian lawfare maneuvering would require careful scrutiny. The article is available in its entirety here.

b. “Sea Power and the Chinese State: China’s Maritime Ambitions”

A recurrent theme of lawfare is how it manifests as a complementary strategy to conventional military strategy, in accordance with its nature as a form of irregular warfare. In a July 11th Heritage Foundation backgrounder by China expert Dean Cheng that primarily focused on Chinese naval and maritime strategy, Mr. Cheng noted that China has been employing “idiosyncratic interpretations” of international law as part of its strategy, and specifically cautioned that “Any congressional consideration of the Law of the Sea Treaty should include a thorough discussion of these Chinese interpretations as well as efforts by China to employ legal warfare, or “lawfare,” to achieve through international law what it cannot achieve through overt pressure.” The backgrounder is available in its entirety here.

c. “The Meanings of 'lawfare'”

An ongoing issue regarding lawfare and the study thereof revolves around defining the term, and while Mr. Silverman cited the LP’s definition above, in a July 11th Legal History Blog entry, legal historian and Law Professor Mary L. Dudziak pointed out that “Lawfare is thought to be of increasing importance, but it seems increasingly clear that the term itself means different things in different circles, and apparently sometimes different things in the same circle.” Although the LP’s definition of the term was not considered, Professor Dudziak noted that “Somehow I find this tension more satisfying than clarity might be.” The posting is available in its entirety here.