Matthew C. Waxman examines whether cyberattacks are a use of force as defined by the UN Charter.

Civil liberties will present the winner of the 2012 U.S. presidential elections with challenges related to counterterrorism powers and practices, as well as challenges related to privacy rights, says CFR's Matthew C. Waxman.

Recent events in Darfur raise the familiar question of whether international law facilitates the kind of early, decisive, and coherent action needed to effectively combat genocide. Matthew C. Waxman argues that putting decisions about international intervention solely in the hands of the UN Security Council risks undermining the threat or use of intervention when it may be most potent in stopping mass atrocities.

In order to gain more congressional support for national security and foreign policy measures, "The Obama administration will need to pick its legislative priorities more deliberately, engage with allies and opponents in Congress more actively, and be willing to negotiate compromises or wage aggressive campaigns on key issues," says Matthew C. Waxman.

Kenneth Anderson and Matthew C. Waxman say some view automated technology developments as a crisis for the laws of war. But provided we start now to incorporate ethical and legal norms into weapons design, the incremental movement from automation to genuine machine autonomy already underway might well be made to serve the ends of law on the battlefield.

Matthew C. Waxman argues that international law still plays a powerful role in justifying or delegitimizing the case for military action. Just like in the Cuban missile crisis, the United States needs to present a plausible case for self-defense in order to strike Iran.

Matthew C. Waxman examines the role of local police in counterterrorism intelligence.

Matthew C. Waxman discusses the lawsuit challenging U.S. participation in the Libyan military mission.

Matthew C. Waxman examines whether cyberattacks are a use of force as defined by the UN Charter.

Recognizing the limitations of current international systems based in The Hague, David A. Kaye provides a strategy for promoting national-level justice and accountability mechanisms to prosecute perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes.

The controversial relationship between the United States and the International Criminal Court (ICC) is at a crossroads: After an initial period of hostility toward the ICC, the United States has in recent years pursued a policy of cautious engagement. Vijay Padmanabhan offers a backdrop of the U.S.-ICC relationship and policy recommendations for the U.S. delegation attending the Seven-Year Review Conference in May/June 2010.

Recent events in Darfur raise the familiar question of whether international law facilitates the kind of early, decisive, and coherent action needed to effectively combat genocide. Matthew C. Waxman argues that putting decisions about international intervention solely in the hands of the UN Security Council risks undermining the threat or use of intervention when it may be most potent in stopping mass atrocities.

The NYPD's new "Domain Awareness System" raises familiar questions about privacy and transparency that are likely to spark a debate at multiple levels of government, writes CFR's Matthew Waxman.

Detainee policy that would mandate military custody for al-Qaeda suspects captured in the United States could have a detrimental impact on U.S. counterterrorism operations, say CFR legal experts Matthew C. Waxman and John B. Bellinger III.

As President Obama prepares to present his case for the Libya intervention, congressional members are squaring off over it. The president is on solid legal ground, but it could erode if Libyan operations continue for months, says CFR's Matthew Waxman.

The Ghailani verdict focuses renewed attention on the debate over how to detain and prosecute terrorism suspects, which will persist until the Obama administration comes up with a firm policy, says CFR's Matthew Waxman.

Which policies have worked and which ones need work ten years after the worst terrorist attacks in U.S. history? CFR experts examine ten issues that have preoccupied U.S. planners.

U.S. drone strikes and "kill/capture" missions against al-Qaeda operatives, particularly in Pakistan and Yemen, have gained new attention and notoriety this spring. Four experts debate the legality and efficacy of the controversial counterterrorism strategy.

News of planned military trials for five 9/11 suspects underscores the Obama administration's need to more forcefully defend the necessity of military tribunals if they are to have legitimacy at home and abroad, says CFR's Matthew Waxman.

Guantanamo Bay, where hundreds of terror suspects have been detained since 9/11, has underscored the need for flexibility and careful balancing in detainee policy to confront twenty-first-century threats, writes CFR's Matthew Waxman.

A snag in the civilian trial of Guantanamo detainee Ahmed Ghalani could be a setback for Obama administration efforts to close Guantanamo.

The Supreme Court's upholding of bans on "material support" for foreign terror groups, even involving legal activities, reflects a further post-9/11 broadening of federal powers, writes CFR's Matthew C. Waxman.

Post-9/11 U.S. counterterrorism and surrounding civil liberties issues are unlikely to stray far from currently policy no matter who is in the White House in 2013, says CFR's Matthew Waxman.