Moral Absolutism in the Wake of Terrorism

In the light of the terrorist attack perpetrated by Hamas against innocent civilians in Israel on October 7th, some contend that “The imperative to protect human dignity only applies absolutely if it applies universally, and it only applies universally if it applies absolutely.” In the face of evil, there is no room for relativism. Hamas’s deliberate attack against innocent civilians is absolutely wrong. Therefore, it should be universally condemned. I agree with the above conclusion. However, I wonder how a universal recognition of an absolute duty of respect for human dignity can help solving the existential conflict confronting Israelis and Palestinians. Ideally, a two-state solution proposed by the international community can be seen as a reasonable and fair compromise. Nevertheless, the reality on the ground is different. This blog post explores the downstream consequences - and hurdles - of moral absolutism in times of war, terror, and existential crisis.

Solidarität mit Israel, aber kein Blankoscheck

Die Taten der Hamas sind in einer ausführlichen Erklärung israelischer Völkerrechtler/-innen, die auch der Verfasser unterschrieben hat, als das benannt worden was sie sind: völkerrechtliche Kernverbrechen, möglicherweise sogar ein gegen die jüdische Bevölkerung Israels gerichteter Genozid. Unter Völker(straf)rechtlern dürfte das weitgehend konsentiert sein, vor allem hierzulande müssen wir uns allerdings selbstkritisch die Folgefrage stellen, wie weit unsere Unterstützung für den militärischen Gegenschlag Israels gehen kann.

Solidarity with Israel, but no Blank Check

The actions of Hamas have been called in a detailed declaration drafted by Israeli international lawyers, also signed by this author, for what they are: core crimes under international law, possibly even amounting to genocide directed against the Jewish population of Israel. This should be beyond dispute among international (criminal) lawyers. Nonetheless, especially in Germany we have to critically ask ourselves the follow-up question of how far our support for Israel’s military counterattack can go.

What is Permissible in the War against Hamas?

What is permissible for the Israeli government to do in response to the murderous attack by Hamas? The answer to this is difficult, not only because blood is boiling and hearts are broken, but also because there is a complex moral dilemma here. In this blog, we hope to offer some guidelines to clarify the issue. We do not claim to provide definitive answers. The required analysis is complex, and it is incumbent upon the Israeli government and the IDF to ensure that the various steps taken are morally justified.

Open letter from Israeli international law experts

The taking of hostages is a blatant violation of international law. We call for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. Pending their release, they are all entitled to be treated with humanity and respect.  This includes the receipt of proper medical care and supply of essential medication for those who need it, and the provision of information regarding the hostages and means of communication with them. We call upon the international community, including all states and relevant international organizations to pressure those holding the hostages to release them all immediately.

False Hope for Democracy in Bosnia & Herzegovina

Bosnia & Herzegovina (B&H) is notoriously hard to govern. Scarred from a bloody war in the 1990s after the collapse of Yugoslavia, the country’s constitutional order emerged in international peace talks in the United States. What later became famous as the Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) might have stopped the war but, in our opinion, sowed the seeds for complex democratic problems today. As we will show in this text, the ECtHR’s judgments represent a false hope for democracy in B&H, because ethnopolitical parties in B&H will not agree on how to implement the ECtHR’s judgments and the Office of the High Representative will not take a more active role in this context. We therefore argue against an earlier contribution on this blog by Woelk (2023), who suggested that the solution for the implementation of the ECtHR’s judgments should come from within the country, as we will show, ethnopolitical actors do not have a real interest in implementing these judgments. To put it bluntly, change from within is, alas, pie in the sky. It is much more likely that nothing changes and the powers that are remain the powers that will be.

Wartime Elections as Democratic Backsliding

The topic of the next elections to the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of Ukraine unexpectedly surfaced in public discourse towards the end of spring this year. Julia Kyrychenko and Olha Ivasiuk’s recent article on Verfassungsblog outlines major legal and practical obstacles to holding wartime elections in Ukraine. In their illuminating analysis, the authors make a strong case against wartime elections, a viewpoint largely shared by civil society. My argument is a bit different. I will argue that (1) wartime parliamentary elections are expressis verbis inconsistent with the Ukrainian Constitution, and (2) wartime elections would undermine the legitimacy of democratic institutions and potentially lead to democratic backsliding.

No Voting Under Fire

Can Ukraine hold elections while it is in the midst of a full-scale invasion by Russia? This question has recently received international attention, including comments from US Senator Lindsey Graham advocating for elections during the war. However, holding elections during the current state of war faces not only factual but also legal obstacles. Genuine democratic elections cannot be conducted under fire from Russian troops.

Un autre coup d’État en Afrique

Am 26. Juli 2023 setzten Angehörige der nigrischen Präsidialgarde Präsident Mohamed Bazoum fest und verkündeten seine Absetzung. Gleichzeitig wurden die Landesgrenzen geschlossen, die Arbeit der staatlichen Institutionen ausgesetzt, eine Ausgangssperre verhängt und die Schaffung einer Militärjunta verkündet. Es war bereits der fünfte Militärputsch in dem Staat seit der Unabhängigkeit von der Kolonialmacht Frankreich im Jahr 1960. Niger war eines der letzten Länder der Sahelzone, das noch über eine demokratisch gewählte Regierung verfügte. Seit 2021 wurden in Staaten der Region wie in Guinea oder im Sudan die Zivilregierungen durch das Militär entmachtet. Die Zahl der Putsche ist so hoch, dass die Region inzwischen auch als „coup belt“ bezeichnet wird. Ist die Demokratieschutzarchitektur der Afrikanischen Union (AU) für den Umgang mit solchen Ereignissen nicht ausreichend?

Colombia, a Besieged Democracy with (New) Oligarchic Tendencies?

On 20 March, Colombia’s newly formed government suspended the cease fire it had only recently concluded with the Clan de Golfo, one of the country’s most powerful, remaining armed non-state actor (ANSA). The announcement followed repeated attacks against civilians in the country’s North-West ascribed to the group. Not even ten days later, the largest remaining guerrilla group, the ELN (also engaged in the government’s Total Peace initiative), killed nine soldiers in an attack in the frontier region with Venezuela. This blogpost details what distinguishes these post-FARC and post-AUC Armed Non State Actors from their predecessors and how their emergence threatens to ensure that Colombia remains a besieged democracy, despite all the progress it has made.