The Lawfare Podcast

Teun Jansenn is a staff member at the European Parliament who works on issues of EU expansion and support for Ukraine. He joined Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the prospects of Europe's stepping up for Ukraine as the United States backs away. He also talked about why EU enlargement is essential to getting EU governance under control and the role that Ukraine might play in that process.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

For today's episode, Lawfare Foreign Policy Editor Daniel Byman interviews Lindsay Cohn, an associate professor at the Naval War College and Columbia University, to discuss the Trump administration's handling of the U.S. military. Cohn discusses the firings of senior military officials, military parades, and the use of the U.S. military at the U.S-Mexico border and in Los Angeles. She also assesses which policies are of genuine concern and which are overstated. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

On today’s episode, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sits down with Lindsay Freeman, Director of Technology, Law & Policy at the Human Rights Center, UC Berkeley School of Law, to discuss her recent Lawfare article, “War Crimes for Fun and Profit.” They talk about how and why so-called war influencers linked to private military companies such as the Wagner Group in the Sahel are posting “conflict content” online. They also address why this graphic and gory content, which often amounts to self-incriminating evidence of war crimes, has led to so little accountability. And finally, they discuss efforts to close that impunity gap, including an Article 15 submission that Freeman and her team at the Human Rights Center sent to the International Criminal Court last fall. Content Warning: This episode contains graphic depictions of violence. Listener discretion is advised.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

In a live conversation on June 27, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow James Pearce and Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower and Roger Parloff to discuss the Supreme Court’s ruling on nationwide injunctions in the birthright citizenship case, the whistleblower complaint about Emil Bove’s actions as deputy attorney general, the disbarment of Kenneth Chesebro, ongoing litigation over the federalization of the California National Guard, and so much more.

From March 19, 2020: What can the president do in a national emergency? What limits what the president can do? What authorizes the president to do all those things he can do in a national emergency? Is the president abusing, misusing, using appropriately, or under-using emergency powers during the coronavirus crisis? And what are the logical end points for how far this could go? For this bonus edition, Benjamin Wittes got on the phone with Steve Vladeck to work through these questions and talk about all things presidential emergency powers.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

From December 5, 2015: The show this week features Natan Sachs, a Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, who recently published an article in Foreign Affairs on anti-solutionism as strategy in the Israel-Palestine conflict.During his conversation with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Ben Wittes, Sachs argues that the apparent absence of a long-term strategy on the Israeli Right for dealing with the Palestinians is actually better described as a belief on the part of the Israeli Right that there are currently no solutions to the challenges Israel faces. Sachs call this policy “strategic conservatism,” noting that at times it has served Israel well, and at others has damaged the country's prospects for peace. Regardless of its effectiveness, Sachs explains that it is a philosophy U.S. policymakers need to better understand in order to make smart decisions about the problems in the Middle East.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

Lawfare Legal Fellow Mykhailo Soldatenko sits down with Eric Ciaramella, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Samuel Charap, Senior Political Scientist at Rand Corporation, to discuss the key issues in the Ukraine-Russia talks. They chat about the national interests of the interested parties, whether a negotiated settlement is possible, and what form a potential agreement may take. They also discuss credible security arrangements for Ukraine to prevent future aggression and various Russian demands, including those related to NATO and neutrality. You may want to look at the following pieces relevant to the discussion. Andriy Zagorodnyuk, Ukraine’s New Theory of Victory Should be Strategic NeutralizationSamuel Charap and Sergey Radchenko, The Talks That Could Have Ended the War in UkraineMykhailo Soldatenko, In the Shadow of the Minsk Agreements: Lessons for a Potential Ukraine-Russia ArmisticeTo receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel’s military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel’s early reach. It’s unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president’s actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president’s decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court’s odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration’s immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you’ll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta’s departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.

Max Smeets, Co-Director of Virtual Routes and Senior Researcher at ETH Zurich, joins Lawfare’s Jonathan Cedarbaum and Justin Sherman to discuss his recently released book “Ransom War: How Cybercrime Became a Threat to National Security.” They discuss the history of ransomware (including the term itself), how the threats have evolved over the years, and some of the major drivers of innovation and entrepreneurialism within the ransomware ecosystem. They discuss Max’s findings on the “trust paradox” facing ransomware groups, the internal business dynamics of ransomware gangs, how governments leverage ransomware operators to their own ends, and how the United States and Europe can respond to future threats.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.