What if America Followed the Rules?

Mamdani video urging Netanyahu arrest2:13

• Meher Mamdani (clip)clip

  The U.S. federal government has the independent authority to execute the ICC's arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu and should do so.

• Linda Kintzleropinion

  The video is rhetorically powerful and articulates moral claims that have been widely negated, but it also exposes the disjuncture between international law's promise and its unactionable reality.

Definition and origins of international law5:11

Linda Kintzler defines international law as encompassing institutions like the ICJ, ICC, and UN, as well as treaties and conventions, but also conceptualizes it as a grammar or language created to order a post-divine world.

Democratic rupture over rules-based order6:50

Ezra Klein describes a rupture in Democratic foreign policy as Biden's promise to restore the rules-based international order confronts failures in Ukraine and Gaza, leading the left to question the order's legitimacy. Linda Kintzler notes the administration's decreasing use of that phrase and terms like war crimes, reflecting the demise of the post-Cold War liberal peace vision.

Focus on Israel versus other conflicts8:52

Ezra Klein relays criticism from Israel supporters asking why Israel and Gaza are the center of international legal ferment rather than Sudan, Syria, or Russia. Kintzler suggests Israel receives unique scrutiny because it is a close U.S. ally, implicating the U.S. differently, while noting similar doublespeak and reluctance by friendly nations to arrest Putin.

Following international law as Democratic policy11:32

Ezra Klein observes a shift among some on the left toward advocating that U.S. foreign policy should simply follow existing international law structures, citing Abdullah Sayed's answer to a newspaper board. Linda Kintzler responds that this approach is insufficient given the U.S.'s grave destruction of international court participation and the unreliability of such commitments, though she agrees the field needs regeneration.

Restraint value of international law13:41

Ezra Klein argues that America would have avoided its worst recent foreign policy mistakes if it had accepted the restraining power of international law and U.N. authorization. Linda Kintzler agrees that Congress's legislative power should act as a restraint and that the world would be worse without international law, but cautions against romanticizing a return to a past U.S.-led liberal order.

Critique of 90s legalism and humanitarian intervention15:38

Ezra Klein recalls the 1990s critique that international systems like the UN were too slow and procedural to prevent atrocities in Rwanda and Yugoslavia, contrasting it with current humanitarian reliance on international law. Linda Kintzler explains this as a historical split where law was viewed either as a heroic tool to prevent atrocities or as a codified license that allowed states to commit crimes legally, citing the Kosovo intervention as a formative extralegal moment.

Legal loopholes enabling atrocities19:41

Linda Kintzler explains that international law creates legal space for atrocities through high standards of proof, such as the specific intent required for a genocide conviction, and the qualification of legitimate military targets, which can explain away attacks and evade legal accountability.

Obama Nobel speech on force and peace21:43

Ezra Klein plays a clip from Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize speech where Obama argues that treaties did not end World War II, force did, and a nonviolent movement could not have stopped Hitler's armies. The conversation turns to the necessity of American power to uphold international ideals and the dilemma of acting without U.N. Security Council approval.

Trump hostility to the ICC23:49

Ezra Klein questions if the U.S. can dismantle international law, prompting Linda Kintzler to explain that while the U.S. is not a party to the ICC, it is making operations difficult by sanctioning sitting judges and threatening American technology access, treating them like members of the Russian government.

Selective use of international law25:58

Ezra Klein and Linda Kintzler discuss the hypocrisy of politicians like Lindsey Graham supporting ICC rulings against Putin while maintaining hostility toward the court when it targets U.S. allies. Kintzler notes the Hague Invasion Act as an example of how the U.S. uses international law selectively to serve its own power interests.

Flexible realism and Machtpolitik28:03

Ezra Klein and Linda Kintzler discuss Machtpolitik, or flexible realism, as a corrupt cousin of realism where unrestrained power leads to mistakes and national demise, describing the Trump administration's belief in exercising surplus American power freed from international forums.

China's use of sovereignty principles30:26

Linda Kintzler suggests that international law can be an expression of power, pointing to China's strategic emphasis on the principle of sovereignty to establish leadership in international forums. She notes the perception that international law is full of loopholes, which China and others exploit to justify actions like those in Tibet or support for Putin.

Sovereignty-based anti-war pact vision32:40

Ezra Klein mentions a vision by scholars Sam Moyn and Aziz Rana for a thinner, sovereignty-based post-American world order resembling an anti-war pact. Linda Kintzler interprets this as a call to return to brass tacks and not discount international law entirely despite failures in Gaza or Ukraine, focusing on the taboo against the crime of aggression and conquest.

Enforcement and moral wrongs34:11

Ezra Klein questions what international law means without police enforcement, and Linda Kintzler discusses the fundamental problem of making moral wrongs legible within brittle legal systems, citing the Eichmann trial and the Oresteia as examples of submitting moral wrongs to legal order to end cycles of vengeance.

Historical memory of genocide39:39

Ezra Klein argues that international law debates are often about imposing historical meaning and memory, specifically that proving genocide against Israel would fundamentally change its historical existence. Linda Kintzler agrees on the symbolic value of an ICJ ruling but notes that the genocide convention has become a memorial to the Holocaust due to its rare use.

Limits of law versus need for leadership42:34

Ezra Klein posits that people want political leadership that prevents atrocities rather than legal rulings after the fact, as law cannot be preventive in this way. Linda Kintzler agrees there is an unquestionable desire for leadership and discusses the tragic nature of international law, noting that people watched ICJ proceedings waiting for a moral verdict that would not come.

Complicity in Gaza versus Ukraine45:16

Ezra Klein and Linda Kintzler discuss why Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Israel's actions in Gaza feel different in American politics. Kintzler suggests the difference lies in the feeling of complicity and the deep affinities tied to Israel, which raises questions about American identity and foreign policy.

Era of wars without discernible ends46:53

Linda Kintzler describes the current era as one of wars with no discernible ends, where ceasefires have replaced lasting peace settlements as a way to sidestep difficult political and moral questions. She attributes this to a lack of political will and the shift away from a unipolar world, noting a loss of moral imagination in international relations.

Regenerating values in international law51:53

Ezra Klein asks if there are pockets of people dreaming of fantastical ideals to regenerate international law values. Linda Kintzler responds that practitioners are rethinking what international law should look like, suggesting a reappraisal toward reparative politics, such as funding the Trust Fund for Victims, to make moral values materially impact people's lives.