Narrator: International conflicts happen every day. And when conflict happens, the phrase "violation of international law" gets echoed again and again and again. Violation of international law. Violations of international law. Violation of international law. Violations of international law. With politicians and world leaders levelling these accusations at one another, is it fair to say that international law is a system that works? Let's unravel international law.

Jutta: So, international law is a set of rules made by countries for countries to follow and it helps manage relationships between them. It works on the principle that all independent countries are equal. The purpose is to provide stability. International law is a way to create order in what otherwise might be anarchy, where there are no rules and where power is the only thing that matters. A prominent international lawyer referred to international law as "the gentle civilizer of nations," and I think that's a very apt way of describing it.

Sangeeta: We typically think of international law in the context of human rights and war, but it also applies to things we don't usually consider, like travel, trade, and space, and the sea. I mean, almost anything that we do and we're entirely used to, none of that would be possible without states agreeing on treaties that regulate international aviation or that the International Postal Union has rules and so on and so on. Think of it this way, the reason you're able to, say... get a long-distance phone call... or have a coffee... send an email or a package... to anyone anywhere in the world is because of international law.

Jutta: So, how are these rules created? International law is created through treaties, agreements, or conventions, with official names and titles. These agreements are carefully negotiated by interested countries. Precisely because states can negotiate the terms, they have a certain amount of control over the terms. They can focus on particular issues and they can also focus the scope of their obligations through that treaty negotiation process.

Sangeeta: Once countries negotiate a treaty, they sign it and ratify it. That last step, ratification, is what makes a treaty or agreement legally binding, meaning a country is obligated to follow it. Understanding all of this, in theory international law sounds like a system that works. Countries negotiate laws, they agree to them, and then they follow them, and for the most part it does work, invisibly, in the background, to make a whole host of things possible. But violations do happen. Those are the instances where it seems like international law isn't working, and those are the moments we tend to notice. So, what happens when a country violates international law?

Jutta: When these kinds of violations become more frequent, then we are getting into more challenging territory. Countries have various avenues for resolving disagreements or violations when they occur depending on the nature of the disagreement or violation. The first avenue is negotiation, but there is also the possibility of going to international courts and tribunals.

Sangeeta: One of those courts is the UN's International Court of Justice, or the ICJ. The ICJ settles complex disputes between countries that have agreed to be subject to it, and it helps clarify various aspects of international law. In a 2024 speech, a former president of the ICJ said that, "more than 90% of the court's judgments are complied with," but what happens when a country doesn't comply? Take this instance. South Africa filed the case at the ICJ against Israel. And in the court hearing, South Africa alleged Israel is carrying out a genocide through its ongoing military actions in Gaza.

South African Representative: Systematic human rights violations has emboldened Israel in its recurrent and intensification of international crimes in Palestine.

Sangeeta: Israel has denied the allegation. As of 2026, the court hasn't issued a ruling on the case. That could take years. But in the meantime, the ICJ has asked Israel to take steps to prevent acts of genocide. That hasn't happened, because even though judgments by the ICJ are legally binding, there is no direct centralized enforcement mechanism to make sure those decisions or orders are carried out. No one can force a country to comply with an ICJ order. Why is that? Well, it brings us back to the concept of sovereignty. States are in charge of their own affairs, and no state would want to subject themselves to any organization as an authority above them. So, what can countries do?

ICJ Judge: The state of Israel shall submit a report to the court... within one month as from the date of this order.

Jutta: Outside of courts and organizations, the international community does have some enforcement tools it can use. A state that is a victim of a violation of international law, it can take retaliatory measures that are lawful. That could be, for example, suspending certain trade relations, the suspension of a treaty, imposing trade sanctions. So, things that ordinarily would not be lawful, but because they're intended not to punish but to bring the violating state back into compliance, they are lawful in those limited circumstances.

Sangeeta: So, can those measures work? A lot will depend on who sanctions and who is being sanctioned, and how many states collaborate in imposing the sanctions. Take Russia's invasion and war on Ukraine that began in 2022 or the U.S.'s actions in Venezuela in early 2026. Both these instances drew widespread condemnation because they're violations of international law, and in Russia's case, several countries imposed economic sanctions, but this has not actually stopped Russian hostilities in Ukraine. So, does international law work? Measures like widespread condemnation and sanctions have historically helped bring countries in line with international law.

Jutta: One example would be the South African apartheid regime, where there were quite successful sanctions collectively imposed. In 1962, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for sanctions, but it wasn't until 1994 that the pressure of those mounting sanctions helped bring an end to the apartheid regime, a full 32 years. It's not working perfectly, but for all its faults, international law, as it has existed since the end of World War II, if all of that was gone, we would be back to a place where violence will be much more the norm and where also a lot of the things that we take for granted aren't possible.