Until now, the UK’s prevailing approach to global conflict and mass atrocities has been one of response and of firefighting. As a result, it too often resulted in missed opportunities to help mitigate harms. Whether in Rakhine in Myanmar in 2017, in Central African Republic in 2014, or Syria in 2011, the window of opportunity to help vulnerable populations closed before the UK had properly recognised the trajectory of violence. There is much to pick through, question, and challenge when reading the new vision for the UK’s international policy as set out in the outcomes document of the year-long Integrated Review of Defence, Development and Diplomacy published by Her Majesty’s Government on Tuesday. But—and particularly with regards to conflict, stability …

On the 12 December, 2019 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded its public hearings on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by the Republic of The Gambia in the case of the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar). The case is the first of three cases against Myanmar in a move to hold the country accountable for the atrocities committed against the Rohingya minority in Rakhine State since August 2017, which drove 730.000 into neighbouring Bangladesh. The International Criminal Court launched an investigation into the persecution of the Rohingya on 14 November while a separate case under the principle of universal jurisdiction was filed in Argentina.  For the …

Last week Yochanan Gordon posted a blog entry on The Times of Israel’s website entitled “When is Genocide Permissible?” The answer to this question so blatantly obvious that one has to wonder why the question was asked. Indeed, this inaugural post was almost one word long. However, I felt compelled to look at Mr. Gordon’s reasoning given that it has caused such outrage among people on both sides of the conflict. To borrow from J.S. Mill, doing otherwise makes dead dogma out of living truth (Mill, 37). Genocide is obviously evil, but the forensic examination of an argument with which we disagree is the best way to refute it and, hopefully, convince those who hold it to put it aside.