Naz Modirzadeh

... For all its routine violence, the American way of war is more and more defined by a near complete immunity from harm for the American side and unprecedented care when it comes to killing people on the other. Today, there are more and more legal obligations to make war more humane – meaning, above all, the aim of minimising collateral harm. ...Written in 2012, the PPG was only publicly released two years later. Harvard Law professor Naz Modirzadeh cuttingly described the document as mixing together a number of “legal-ish” standards. The optics of humane behaviour, Modirzadeh suggested, were “being used to give an international law-like gloss” to “an approach that most allies see as violating” other parts of international law, most of all the rules controlling force.

This week on Hold Your Fire!, Richard Atwood and Naz Modirzadeh talk to Crisis Group’s Senior Adviser for the Middle East and North Africa, Dina Esfandiary, about what drove Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, among other Gulf states, to cut diplomatic ties with Qatar in 2017, why the Gulf Arab countries announced an end to the crisis in January 2021 and whether the rift is truly over. They reflect on what this means for the foreign policies of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and how their leaders see their priorities and challenges in the region. They also discuss what the spat has meant for crises across the region where the GCC countries are involved.

A podcast by Rob Malley and Naz Modirzadeh: This week on Hold Your Fire!, Rob reminisces about his recent trip to Azerbaijan, where he saw warning signs of a “frozen conflict” ready to thaw. Naz explains why the U.S. might regret trying to designate the Huthis as a terrorist organization if it cares about  helping Yemen make peace. They are joined by Aaron Miller, a veteran U.S. diplomat and Carnegie senior fellow, who examines the successes and shortcomings of President Trump’s unconventional diplomacy, and explains how the phrase “nobody ever washes a rental car” applies to conflict prevention.

An article by Dustin Lewis and Naz Modirzadeh: A debate is emerging slowly at the United Nations headquarters: Can and should a counterterrorism body authoritatively and authentically interpret and assess compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL), the principal body of law regulating armed conflicts? At first glance, that debate might seem merely niche or technocratic—one fast-tracked to the annals of international law pedantry. But when viewed in its proper context, the debate raises several concerns that may have cascading effects of great significance. Indeed, how it is ultimately resolved may entail consequences for safeguards for populations ravaged by armed conflict as well as the integrity and coherence of the system of legal protection in war. Along with our co-author, Jessica S. Burniske, we examine these issues in a new briefing for the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence have the potential to affect many aspects of our lives in significant and widespread ways. Certain types of machine learning systems—the major focus of recent AI developments—are already pervasive, for example in weather predictions, social media services and search engine results, online recommendation systems. Machine learning is also being applied to complex applications that include predictive policing in law enforcement and ‘advice’ for judges when sentencing in criminal justice. Meanwhile, growing resources are being allocated to developing other AI applications. ...We asked some of the experts to distill—in under 300 words—some of the key issues and concerns that they believe we aren’t thinking enough about now when it comes to the future on AI and armed conflict. ...Naz K. Modirzadeh, Founding Director & Dustin A. Lewis, Senior Researcher, Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict. "Looking to the future of artificial intelligence and armed conflict, those of us concerned about international law should prioritize (among other things) deeply cultivating our own knowledge of the rapidly changing technologies. And we should make that an ongoing commitment. There is a perennial question about subject-matter expertise and the law of armed conflict; consider cyber operations, weaponeering and nuclear technology. When it comes to the increasingly impactful and diverse suite of techniques and technologies labeled ‘AI’, the concern takes on a different magnitude and urgency. That’s in no small part because commentators have assessed that AI has the potential to transform armed conflict—and not just the conduct of hostilities.

By Gabby Blum LL.M. '01 S.J.D. '03 and Naz Modirzadeh '02: Committed to the notion that international law can play a role in shaping conduct, including in war, the attacks of 9/11 — and the ensuing violence and warfare — have forced us to face the weaknesses of our current legal regimes and address the challenges that they must be able to withstand. Continue Reading »