Elliot Serbin
@eserbin.bsky.social
International law, wmd nonpro/disarmament, all things nuclear
Reposted by Elliot Serbin
I wrote about unit self defense in this piece in a very different context. It’s always been a slippery slope. But whatever the contours, unit self defense is not an available defense to invading a country without legal cause. A state can’t use it to backfill a defense to their armed attack.
Legally Sliding into War
"We need to grapple with the legal mechanisms through which presidential administration after administration has legally justified escalating, elongating, and expanding conflicts over the last two dec...
www.justsecurity.org
January 3, 2026 at 11:08 AM
I wrote about unit self defense in this piece in a very different context. It’s always been a slippery slope. But whatever the contours, unit self defense is not an available defense to invading a country without legal cause. A state can’t use it to backfill a defense to their armed attack.
Reposted by Elliot Serbin
“Like Prime, but with human beings.”
December 24, 2025 at 5:42 PM
“Like Prime, but with human beings.”
Reposted by Elliot Serbin
8/ A public service reminder:
This entire exercise is an absurd, imaginary world for legal experts.
That's because the truth is:
It's not an armed conflict.
The laws of war thus don't apply.
The more restrictive rules of human rights apply.
It's extrajudicial killing under that law.
This entire exercise is an absurd, imaginary world for legal experts.
That's because the truth is:
It's not an armed conflict.
The laws of war thus don't apply.
The more restrictive rules of human rights apply.
It's extrajudicial killing under that law.
December 4, 2025 at 2:34 AM
8/ A public service reminder:
This entire exercise is an absurd, imaginary world for legal experts.
That's because the truth is:
It's not an armed conflict.
The laws of war thus don't apply.
The more restrictive rules of human rights apply.
It's extrajudicial killing under that law.
This entire exercise is an absurd, imaginary world for legal experts.
That's because the truth is:
It's not an armed conflict.
The laws of war thus don't apply.
The more restrictive rules of human rights apply.
It's extrajudicial killing under that law.
Reposted by Elliot Serbin
6/ This next point gets deeper into some legal weeds, but law of war experts will know exactly what I mean.
The fact that the DOJ/USG wants to call these cocaine boats legitimate "war-sustaining" military targets, makes this new explanation fall apart.
The fact that the DOJ/USG wants to call these cocaine boats legitimate "war-sustaining" military targets, makes this new explanation fall apart.
December 4, 2025 at 2:30 AM
6/ This next point gets deeper into some legal weeds, but law of war experts will know exactly what I mean.
The fact that the DOJ/USG wants to call these cocaine boats legitimate "war-sustaining" military targets, makes this new explanation fall apart.
The fact that the DOJ/USG wants to call these cocaine boats legitimate "war-sustaining" military targets, makes this new explanation fall apart.