International law as a discipline in crisis

One of the most influential international law articles of the past 20 years is entitled ‘International Law: A Discipline of Crisis’. Authored by Hilary Charlesworth in the aftermath of the NATO intervention in Kosovo, the article articulated a compelling feminist critique of the politics, aesthetics and implications of the discipline’s over-emphasis on crises. I revisit Charlesworth’s article with an eye on the field’s profound divisions regarding Israel’s war on Gaza. Charlesworth’s critique correctly assumed a degree of disciplinary convergence when it came to the identification of crises, even as opinions about the right response diverged. This background consensus has disintegrated in light of the field’s divergent attitudes towards the war on Gaza. As different sections of the discipline adopt diametrically opposed positions regarding the severity of the facts on the ground and their importance for international law as a field of practice and study, international law moves from being a discipline of crisis into being a discipline in crisis.