The optimism surrounding the universalisation of international legal norms in the post-Cold War era has gradually eroded amid the resurgence of geopolitical rivalries and dominant powers exploiting law for their own gain. Key institutions, particularly the UN Security Council, have struggled to respond effectively to ongoing conflicts such as the war in Ukraine and the genocide in Gaza. This highlights the increasing gap between legal principles and political realities. However, rather than signalling the end of international law, these crises have also drawn attention to the potential of legal institutions such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) to assert their authority. This has been demonstrated in recent proceedings concerning genocide and war crimes. Against this backdrop, calls for structural reform and a more equitable international order — as reflected in Türkiye’s advocacy for global justice and its critique of institutional asymmetries — have gained new relevance.
This session will explore whether the current crises could signal a turning point in the revitalisation of international legal frameworks. It will explore the evolving role of international courts, the implications of ongoing legal proceedings, and the normative ambitions of states advocating reform. Ultimately, the discussion will assess whether today’s legal and political transformations can generate momentum for a more resilient and inclusive rules-based order.
Discussion Themes:
- To what extent have recent geopolitical crises exposed the limitations of existing international legal mechanisms?
- Can ongoing proceedings at the ICJ and ICC restore the credibility and authority of international law?
- How do calls for institutional reform—such as Türkiye’s advocacy for global justice—reshape debates on the future of multilateralism?
- What role can middle powers play in advancing a more inclusive and resilient international legal order?