Malcolm Jorgensen

Schrödinger's Rules-Based Order: Both dead and alive in #IranWar

Zitat: „Die Verletzung der UN-Charta liegt hier so offen zutage, wie es deutlicher kaum sein könnte.“

Die USA und Israel haben mit einem Militärangriff auf den Iran begonnen.

MARKO MILANOVIĆ zeigt, warum sich die Militärschläge nicht als Selbstverteidigung nach Art. 51 der UN-Charta rechtfertigen lassen und offenkundig gegen das Völkerrecht verstoßen.

verfassungsblog.de/warum-der-er...

President of the European Commission @vonderleyen.ec.europa.eu recommits to destroying the international legal order every time she invokes “international law”, but acquiesces to blatant illegality by Western powers.

Canada rightly condemns the Iran regime but then says it supports the US-led war in Iran, despite it violating international law, a topic on which PM Carney is silent.

Is abandoning international law what Carney meant by principled realism in his Davos speech?

I’d like to know what Carney meant by sovereignty and territorial integrity and the rules-based order when he spoke these words just one month ago.

Scientists no Longer Find Twitter Professionally Useful, and have Switched to Bluesky Synopsis. Social media has become widely used by the scientific community for a variety of professional uses, including networking and public outreach. For

Scientists no Longer Find Twitter Professionally Useful, and have Switched to Bluesky: academic.oup.com/icb/article-...

The central concept of Rubio’s #MSC speech was “Western civilisation” as a shared ethno-religious (Christian) transatlantic identity. Anti-migration and incompatible with an inclusive European identity grounded in liberal values. Yet it received a standing ovation and high praise by the MSC Chair.

Pauline Hanson’s racist rhetoric cast a shadow over my childhood. Here we are again | Zoya Patel As a first generation immigrant, it is gutting to see Australians falling for One Nation’s anti-immigration rhetoric 30 years on from Hanson’s initial rise I’ve been cynical about politics for a long time, especially when it comes to Australian attitudes to racism and immigration. The latter has always been the favourite scapegoat of rightwing politicians to blame for anything they don’t want to meaningfully address through policy – house prices rising? Unemployment rates too high? Economic inequality growing? It’s because of all those foreigners, obviously, coming here to steal jobs, houses and food right out of the mouths of “Aussie families”. It’s so predictable it’s almost boring. But I will admit that even my hardened black heart was dismayed to see the recent polls that show a rise in popularity for One Nation. While I know that the factors driving poll outcomes are complex, it is gutting to see Australians falling for the same rubbish 30 years after I thought we were done with Pauline Hanson for good. Continue reading...

Pauline Hanson’s racist rhetoric cast a shadow over my childhood. Here we are again | Zoya Patel

Probably both things are true - powerful autocracies will take advantage of US withdrawal to claim legitimacy for their legal interpretations, while other states will mimic the US and dispense with the rhetoric altogether. Disorder prevails in other words!

Excellent piece by @sophieduroy.bsky.social @lucatrenta.bsky.social. I disagree only that if US “no longer feels compelled to justify its actions in legal terms, other states—especially authoritarian regimes—are likely to follow suit”. Instead 🇨🇳🇷🇺 already cynically claim guardianship of int. law.

Quote: “Germany and the other European states cannot afford to abandon international law – and the international legal order cannot be preserved with only selective commitment to it.”

The US intervention in Venezuela marks more than another breach of international law.

HELMUT PHILIPP AUST, CLAUS KREß, and HEIKE KRIEGER on the US government’s descent into lawlessness — and its consequences for the global legal order

verfassungsblog.de/the-end-of-a...

International Law Is Holding Democracies Back The United States should use this moment to argue for a different approach to the rules of war.

Trump has said US duty to comply with int. law 'depends what your definition of international law is'. What this means might be John Yoo's perverse argument: 'If international law is to retain relevance, it will have to follow power, not pretend to constrain it'
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...

In (partial) defence of the 'Rules-Based Order': Canadian PM Mark Carney has made headlines by challenging leaders at Davos to: ‘Stop invoking the “rules-based international order” as though i... In (partial) defence of the 'Rules-Based Order': Canadian PM Mark Carney has made headlines by challenging leaders at Davos to: ‘Stop invoking the “rules-based international order” as though it still ...

www.linkedin.com/posts/malcol...

🌍 Greenland & International Law

Katja Göcke’s 2009 #ZaöRV article breaks down Greenland’s legal status under international law—a very topical (re-)read in light of current headlines and Trump’s expressed interest in U.S. control over Greenland. Read now #OpenAccess.

www.zaoerv.de/69_2009/69_2...

Whether international law is interpreted in terms of the RBO, MIO or some alternative framing, is ultimately likely to be determined by geopolitical spheres of influence. The consequences for international law may include the emergence of parallel ‘geolegal’ orders, in which preponderant power is used to uphold preferred interpretations as effective political norms, by informing the rational incentives for state interactions at the regional level independently of coherence with the broader legal system.70 Edward Luttwak is credited with first describing geopolitical forces operating in the economic sphere as ‘geoeconomics’, which followed his observation that, so long as states and blocs of states compete, activity in the economic sphere cannot merely follow a commercial logic ‘without regard to frontiers’.71 Paraphrasing Luttwak in an era when leading states are promoting alternative political frames for international law, as ‘territorial entities, spatially rather than functionally defined, states cannot follow a legal logic that would ignore their own boundaries’.72 States falling within the respective spheres of influence of the West, China or other centres of power, may increasingly be compelled to take account of the conceptions of political order that compete to frame their international legal rights and duties. Moving beyond mere terminological debate will require a more contextual examination of the substantively different constellations of legal and non-legal norms that actually comprise each claimed order.

2/ US, China and Russia are among those driving the shift from int. legal order to ‘geolegal orders’: spheres of influence in which the interpretation and operation of international law is determined by geostrategic power. An extract from my prior analysis below plus link: doi.org/10.1177/2753...

1/ 'I don't need international law' has made headlines, but in context Trump agreed US 'needs to abide by int. law on the global stage', saying 'Yeah I do, but it depends on what your definition of int. law is'. That sentiment confirms 'geolegal' reordering, where law reinforces spheres of influence

US attacks on Venezuela and the abduction of Nicolás Maduro raise profound legal and geopolitical concerns, with implications well beyond Venezuela itself. In a new post co-authored with Julian Arato, we examine the attack and its broader consequences under international law.

Pleased to speak with @charliesavage.bsky.social about how the U.S. military intervention in Venezuela breaches the UN Charter and the Take Care Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Into the void: how Trump killed international law The rules-based global order, its institutions and value system face a crisis of legitimacy and credibility as the US turns away

International law’s resilience requires literacy and legitimacy beyond international lawyers and scholars. @Patrickwintour.bsky.social @theguardian.com well bridges the divide here—including relationship with the “rules-based order” I have examined in recent years www.theguardian.com/law/ng-inter...

Eduard Gaertner Berlín, 1801-Zechlin, 1877 Vista de la Opera y del Unter den Linden, Berlín A View of the Opera and Unter den Linden, Berlin 1845

Nice surprise to catch this little glimpse of the now @humboldtuni.bsky.social law school, in the Altes Palais on Unter den Linden—Eduard Gartner (1845), Thyssen-Bornemisza National Museum, Madrid.

Honoured to deliver a Madrid keynote at @uc3m.es workshop ‘Global Justice in a Changing Global Order: Existing Models and Future Frameworks’—on exceptions/‘exceptionalism’ and the ICC. Concluding with a site visit to Valle de los Caídos, Franco’s fascist monument and former tomb.

The central concept of the newly released U.S. National Security Strategy appears to be security defined in “hemispheric” terms—the terminology appears 27 times. Fixed on a so-called “Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine” across the “Western Hemisphere”
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u...

#NewProfilePic (as my one from 8 years ago became increasingly implausibly youthful👴)

Genuinely impressive first day of @nyu.edu U.S.-Asia Law Institute workshop ‘Decoding China’s Foreign-Related Rule of Law’, 21–22 November. My own paper on China’s quest to remake forms of ‘hegemonic legitimacy’ defining the international legal order—📖forthcoming.

Proof of concept in New York🗽, with all three editors of the forthcoming “Elgar Encyclopedia of Law and Diplomacy” finally in the same city at the same time @elgarpublishing.bsky.social—with @peggymcguinness.bsky.social and @ramseswessel.bsky.social

Yesterday’s lecture on the shift “From International Legal Order to Geolegal Orders”, at the College of Law, National Taipei University,Taiwan🇹🇼 Thanks to Prof. Wendy Ho for hosting and the impressive student questions!

An honour to meet with the Dean of College of Law and Politics, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung Taiwan🇹🇼 Followed by a seminar with grad students on the changing international legal order and international economic law - many thanks to Prof. Cindy Whang for hosting!

“America at 250” @americanacademy.bsky.social, with Jeffrey Goldberg, Helen Lewis, George Packer, and Ashley Parker @theatlantic.com—“Trump is the end of American exceptionalism” - we’re now just like everyone else

Rehabilitating the “Neocons” is no Zeitenwende

Dick #Cheney was no “neocon” in the proper sense of that term, but given some of the public praise he’s now receiving it’s worth reminding of his catastrophic legacy in office—in terms of eroding global security and in polarising domestic politics
verfassungsblog.de/the-neocons-...

Deckenleuchte Palast der Republik

Deckenleuchte Palast der Republik

Spotted: Part of the old GDR “Palast der Republik” lives on at a Berlin Music venue 🇩🇪🚩