Brutal Peace: Lieber Code, NATO mission, and personal journey, by Georgia Law 3L Miles S. Porter


In this item, Miles S. Porter, a J.D. candidate in the University of Georgia School of Law Class of 2021, reflects on his Spring 2020 full-semester externship at NATO HQ SACT in Norfolk, Virginia. Miles’ background includes: B.A. degree in international relations and German, University of South Carolina 2011; U.S. Army active duty 2013-2018, including tour in Afghanistan; and U.S. Army reservist since 2018.

Peace can be brutal. I am reminded of this axiom as an unwelcome silence invades my office space from the street below. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought life to what some have called a “peaceful” and “virtual” standstill. But with an unprecedented 30-plus million Americans claiming unemployment in the last month, “brutal” seems a more appropriate descriptor.

Like many of my peers, I finished my spring semester externship from home, a mere 800 socially distanced miles from my worksite, the NATO headquarters in Norfolk. Early on, I had looked forward to watching the 30th flag raised at Norfolk in honor of North Macedonia’s recent membership, to enjoying the parade of nations at the NATO Festival, and to hearing former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation General James Mattis speak at the Norfolk Forum. Instead I am at home, reflecting.

While America finds itself embroiled in yet another metaphorical war, against COVID,  perhaps it is appropriate then that my thoughts have ultimately turned to war itself. Specifically, they have turned to a theory of war that decries the paradox of a “humane war.” This paradox is explored in the 2012 book I read as part of my externship tutorial: Lincoln’s Code: The Laws of War in American History, by Yale Law Professor John Fabian Witt. A compelling narrative about one of the first codifications of the laws of war and perhaps one of the earliest uses of lawfare, Lincoln’s Code is more page-turning adventure story than legal treatise.

The book’s conclusions, far from uncontroversial, initially resonated with me. But they also raised important questions about the role of NATO, the rule of law, and the future of warfare. This post will examine those questions, then end with some thoughts on my NATO experience.

Now to “Old Hundred.”

“Old Hundred”

The U.S. War Department issued General Order No. 100, also known as the Lieber Code, in May 1863, at the height of America’s bloodiest war. Commissioned by President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton, and endorsed by the General-in-Chief of all Union Armies, Henry Halleck—an attorney himself—the “Old Hundred” was a necessary contribution to the Union’s war efforts. First, it helped frame the conflict in legal terms, extending law of war protections to prisoners and proving to foreign states that the Union’s actions were in fact legitimate. Second, it enabled Lincoln to achieve his goal of emancipation.

Lincoln had won the 1860 election on a platform that denounced the expansion of slavery into new states. This precipitated the secession of South Carolina even while James Buchanan was still President, and set the nation on the path to civil war.

The story of The Code is told in tandem with the story of its author, and the maxims within are better read as a story of lessons learned. While Francis Lieber was an academic, a professor first at the University of South Carolina and later at what is now Columbia University, he was also a soldier. He was someone who had his family and his life torn apart by war. His sons fought on opposite sides during the conflict he helped to end. Rather than devote himself to pacifism, however, Lieber thought the call to arms was “the most honorable calling of mankind” and that “when carried on by civilized peoples, just wars were the way civilization spread. … Justice, not peace, [was] the highest ideal.”  (Witt 178). Not only did he believe in the importance of just wars, Lieber had kept slaves himself for a time and had seen firsthand the effects of slavery while living in South Carolina. It is in this context that “Old Hundred” should be read.

A notable characteristic of Lieber’s work was that it ran counter to then-conventional doctrine on the laws of war. Lieber openly spoke out against the end of war advocated by the leading contemporary European thinkers (182), preferring the writings of older theorists like Clausewitz. Humanizing wars, in Lieber’s opinion, had the paradoxical effect of prolonging human suffering.  He urged short and sharp wars because “the more earnestly and keenly wars are carried on, the better for humanity, for peace and civilization.” (184) This became the basis for the last sentence in Article 29 of his Code:

“Sharp wars are brief.”

The principle at the essence of the Code is military necessity. As Witt shows, military necessity became an almost absolute power, remarkable for what it forbade and more remarkable for what it allowed. Torture was expressly forbidden but the starvation of villages, emancipation of slaves as enemy property, and martial law were permitted, even expected. And yet the principle persisted, so that in the present day military necessity is one of the five accepted principles of the laws of armed conflict, or LOAC.

“Old Hundred” quickly gained traction abroad. European lawyers and politicians had been searching to codify their own “enlightened” laws of war after over a century of bloody conflicts. To this end, they concluded the very first Geneva Convention in 1864. Yet delegates at that Geneva Conference, influenced by some of the more pacifistic thinkers of the day, had gone in a somewhat different direction than Lieber. Their Convention outlawed some of the barbarities of war, reforming war in the hopes of one day ending it altogether. This approach foretold advancements in the laws of war that would occur in the wake of the World Wars of the 20th century.

Choosing an Approach

The Charter of the United Nations was signed and entered into force in 1945.  A short five years later, the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO’s founding document, likewise was signed and entered into force. Today, in 2020, Kabul, Afghanistan, has been the site of armed conflict and a nearly two-decades-long military presence by America and its NATO allies. The fact provokes questions:

  • Is the “forever war” a byproduct of the humanization of warfare?
  • Is that result what Francis Lieber had fought so vehemently against? Or is it merely indicative of the progress made towards the abolishment of warfare as an institution, which the United Nations and its progeny were designed to facilitate?
  • By sheathing the short war, have we lost a valuable weapon in our proverbial arsenal, holding ourselves to morals that our less scrupulous foes may not?

These were the questions that I faced after reading Lincoln’s Code.

Initially, I embraced the short, sharp wars advocated by Lieber, Tolstoy, and Clausewitz. Frustrated by a perceived lack of progress in recent war efforts and the absence of defining victories (ignoring a certain shipboard declaration of victory), my inclination was towards a strategy of power, shock, and awe. I thought that .

After further consideration, I think maybe this initial reaction was a bit rash: While I agree with many of the principles and ideals set forth by Lieber and his short-war sympathizers, I believe that he made some key mistakes. Like many who romanticize, he failed to account for the realities of the world.

If we do the same, we do so at our own peril.

Short wars reached their pinnacle with the Cold War. That is ironic since the Cold War was long – nearly a half-century prompted by the threat of the ultimate short war, nuclear war.  The international community has since demonstrated a strong aversion to this inhumane form of short war, to the point that in a near-peer conflict it may be more than ill-advised, it may be a nearly impossible strategy to pursue.  The changing instrumentalities of war, towards weapons of mass destruction, have altered the calculus of war.  As America’s near-peer adversaries retain an interest in a balanced geo-political environment, even short wars with non-nuclear equipped opponents seems unlikely.  The new realities of warfare include nuclear weapons, and as long as this remains true, the possibility of short wars will remain distant.

Post-Cold War NATO, or NATO 2.0, represents the other side of this equation. The military alliance, initially established as a After the USSR fell, NATO endured. It participated in some of the largest humanitarian efforts of the 20th and 21st centuries, in places like Kosovo, Haiti, and Afghanistan.

In truth, globalization, the threat of nuclear warfare, and a determined international effort to outlaw war have changed the face of warfare completely. Warfare today is about competition, about living in the gray areas of the law. It resembles humanitarian aid more than it does Gettysburg or Antietam.

Democracy, liberty, and the rule of law are the conquering tools of warfare in the 21st century. They have enabled the alliance to grow to 30 full-fledged members, to conclude official partnerships with 20 Partnership for Peace nations, as well as to develop relationships with numerous other nations from disparate corners of the earth, from Australia to Colombia to Pakistan. The great deterrents in today’s conflicts are not so much weapons as they are the financial costs of waging expeditionary wars and the potential damaging of financial systems. In this environment, communities of peace built on a common foundation are capable of outlasting more powerful foes.

NATO is also capable of holding its own during armed conflicts when they arise. (Another discussion could be had about member nations’ willingness to uphold their article 5 commitment of mutual defense, but that is a separate issue.) NATO retains flexibility in the deployment of its rules of engagement, which allow member nations to pursue their individual national interests while retaining a unity of effort. Effective management of NATO forces requires mastery of this concept by commanders across echelons. Once achieved, it leaves the alliance with plenty of capabilities to accomplish the mission.

Irish poet Robert Lynd once said:

“The belief in the possibility of a short, decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human delusions.”

The short wars envisioned by Lieber require justice to be the prevailing value in the pursuit of national objectives, and that in turn requires the actors pursuing these objectives to act justly.  The limited set of circumstances where this is achievable make his theory complicated enough to make unwise policy.  The abuses of the Code’s ideas that took place in subsequent conflicts, like the one in the Philippines at the turn of the 20th century, make this clear.  As Witt demonstrated in Lincoln’s Code, the principle of military necessity acted as a cloak that attempted to legitimize abhorrent acts.

Whether organizations like NATO go too far in their pursuit of peace, whether they are influenced too much by groups trying to humanize an inherently inhumane act, strike me as unnecessary questions in today’s environment. Competition will indeed manifest itself as “forever wars.” I find this outcome preferable to the alternative of a persistent nuclear threat. 

Final Thoughts

I have found that even dream jobs can begin to show their faults after a few weeks. While NATO certainly suffers from its shortcomings, this job never lost its appeal. In fact, most of what I initially saw as shortcomings eventually appeared to have been deliberate components of NATO’s grand design. The endless hours needed to exhaust every opinion on a topic until consensus is reached certainly can be challenging. The fact that every nation gets a voice at all, however, is truly amazing.

One of my mentors at NATO once told me,

“The beauty of NATO is that it is.”

I hope that despite its challenges in the future, it will always continue to be.

GGSS Professional development briefings in Brussels

BRUSSELS – Students taking part in the Global Governance Summer School went to Brussels today for professional development briefings. They were exposed to a range of practice areas, from non-governmental organization advocacy, to intergovernmental work, to private law practice.

The day began with a visit to the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO). There, students were treated to a dialogue on human rights lawyering with Ralph J. Bunche (left), UNPO General Secretary and Professor Diane Marie Amann. They discussed the work of the organization — advocating for the self-determination of unrepresented peoples and nations — and the day-to-day work of advocacy in a human rights organization.

Next, the group traveled to the new headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Steven Hill (fifth from the right, at right), Legal Adviser and Director of the Office of Legal Affairs, took students on a tour of the facility and provided an overview of the work of the Legal Office at NATO. He particularly focused on the text of the North Atlantic Treaty, emerging technologies, and contemporary challenges to the NATO alliance.

Finally, students heard from David Hull (JD ’83) and Porter Elliot (JD ’96) (left), partners at Van Bael & Bellis about private law practice in Brussels. They discussed the practice areas of the firm – primarily European Union competition law and trade law. They shared candid career advice with students, including their personal stories of going from law school in Athens, Georgia to law practice in Brussels.

The day concluded with a reception, graciously hosted by Van Bael & Bellis. The second annual Friends of the Dean Rusk International Law Center Reception, we were pleased to reconnect with alumni/ae and other European partners of the Center.

Tomorrow, the students will return to the classroom, and celebrate the 4th of July deepening their understanding of international law.

Georgia Law 3L Lauren Brown on her NATO externship in Belgium: “a full appreciation for the privileges we enjoy and the responsibilities we bear”

Pleased today to welcome this post by University of Georgia School of Law student Lauren Brown, working this Spring 2019 semester in Mons, Belgium, in the legal department of a leading unit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Pictured above right, she is the inaugural holder of this externship, administered by our law school’s Dean Rusk International Law Center in partnership with NATO Allied Command Transformation. Lauren arrived at Georgia Law with considerable background in security policy, and her experiences here have included a Summer 2017 Global Externship Overseas at the nongovernmental organization War Child Holland. She is due to receive her J.D. degree this May, and thereafter to become an Associate at the Washington, D.C., office of the law firm Squire Patton Boggs. Lauren recounts her ongoing NATO experience below.

The opportunity to work with the Allied Command Transformation (ACT) Legal Advisor’s Office at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) Staff Element Europe (SEE) has been a unique and exciting experience. At this halfway mark, I am very pleased with what I have been able to experience thus far, and I look forward to the coming weeks as the externship continues.

My observations can be broadly divided into three categories, legal experience, professional experience, and practical experience, each of which I discuss below.

Legal Experience

It is important to note that I have carefully crafted much of my previous and future working life to avoid two things: complex math and regulatory work. Accordingly, my hopes were somewhat dashed when I received my first assignment: Draft a data protection and privacy regulation.

The actual work, however, was absolutely fascinating. The ultimate challenge was to create a directive that provided sufficient data protection and privacy standards and that struck a balance among the disparate domestic standards. The work also involved coordination with existing data protection and privacy directives within other NATO bodies, in order to ensure the provisions allowed for a workable level of cohesion across policies.

The resulting effort felt very much like a logic puzzle, with each component capable of fitting, and the task being to figure out how to make it fit. The assignment was a tremendous introduction to the legal experience within the externship. It demonstrated that although focus and ambition are important, flexibility and an open mind are also critical. Without them, I would have missed an opportunity to participate in a fascinating project and expand my interests—even to include regulatory work.

Professional Experience

Before arriving at NATO, I had been extremely fortunate in that I’d had opportunities to work in several different cities, in several different professional environments. But I had never before experienced the working life of a military base. The primary adjustment has been the strictness of the adherence to decorum and hierarchy—and the impressive bureaucracy that accompanies such practice. In my time here, I have learned that even when the waters seem murky and the process opaque, there are always channels that move a little more swiftly, and success in such an organization appears to be directly related to one’s ability to identify and utilize such avenues.

Practical Experience

I have also enjoyed experiences that resonate beyond the professional sphere. Two such instances were particularly impactful:

  • The first occurred during a training on rules of engagement at NATO Allied Joint Force Command (JFC) Brunssum in the Netherlands (site of the photos accompanying this post). By the time of this training, I had become accustomed to the presence of uniforms and their associated patches, which usually denote membership in a division or the service member’s assigned NATO unit. On the last day of the training, however, a new patch caught my eye: a large square stating the bearer’s blood type. The realization of when such a patch would be useful, and its place as a standardized part of the uniform, reminded me of a fact I had clearly forgotten: this exercise was not just theoretical. The reliance these men and women have on laws of armed conflict and rules of engagement dictate life and death choices in very real, and very dangerous, situations.
  • The second served largely the same realization; that is, it reinforced my understanding of the scale at which laws, and their functioning or not, can impact people. I met a friend in Paris for a weekend, and through a course of events that can sometimes happen during travel, we found ourselves marching with the so-called Yellow Vests calling for action against climate change. The group with which we marched was peaceful and numbered very close to 10,000. But a few hours later, we encountered the other group of Yellow Vests, the militant wing of violent rioters who burned or broke almost every structure they encountered. For me, the experience reiterated the idea that when laws or policies fail people, people may react. The rules that govern our social existence must be crafted and interpreted with care, and without negligence toward the future or the marginalized.

The patches and the protests were powerful reminders, both on an intimate and broader level, that what attorneys do matters. We cannot undertake our work with anything but a full appreciation for the privileges we enjoy and the responsibilities we bear.

I feel extremely fortunate for the opportunity to have such an experience while in law school, and I want to especially thank the NATO personnel with whom I have interacted in Belgium, including attorneys Lewis Bumgardner, Galateia Gialitaki, and Steven Hill, as well as Georgia Law professors Kathleen Doty and Diane Marie Amann, for making this externship possible.

Human rights, criminal justice, NATO, business practice, reception with Georgia Law alums: Global Governance Summer School day 3, Brussels

Professor Amann, Ana Sofie Silveira, Lucia Hakala, Eunjun Kim, Bryant Oliver, Professor Doty, NATO Legal Adviser Steven Hill, Hanna Karimipour, Maddie Neel, Julian Skoruppa, Brooke Carrington, Saif Ahmed, Caroline Harvey, Mills Culver, and Frances Plunkett

BRUSSELS – A variety of briefings in this Belgium capital, and home of many European Union institutions, highlighted day 3 of the Global Governance School that our University of Georgia School of Law Dean Rusk International Law Center offers with the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies at KU Leuven, one of Europe’s premier research institutions.

Our cohort of students from Georgia Law and multiple European universities first traveled to the Brussels office of No Peace Without Justice (left), a nongovernmental organization founded a quarter-century ago to promote “the protection and promotion of human rights, democracy, the rule of law and international justice.” There Alison A. Smith (left), Legal Counsel and Director of the organization’s International Criminal Justice Program, took part in a dialogue on “International Human Rights Lawyering” with Georgia Law Professor Diane Marie Amann, Emily & Ernest Woodruff Chair in International Law and one of our Center’s Faculty Co-Directors. Then the organization’s Secretary-General, Niccolò A. Figà-Talamanca, described the Rome diplomatic conference that led to adoption in 1998 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Next, Steven Hill, Legal Adviser and Director of the Office of Legal Affairs at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, outlined the work of his office, where an 8-lawyer team serves as counsel to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenburg and further liaises with NATO lawyers throughout the world. He then discussed key issues likely to be discussed at next week’s NATO Summit. (Preparations for that meeting of member states’ heads of state and government precluded a visit to the new NATO headquarters; we are grateful to the Brussels law firm Van Bael & Bellis for providing the lovely conference room, pictured above, where our students met with Hill.)

Finally, we made our way to the Brussels office of Sidley Austin LLP. There Stephen Spinks (Georgia Law JD’76), a member of our Dean Rusk International Law Center Council, led a presentation on key areas of global business practice at his office. Spinks is the immediate past managing partner of that office, and a well-known lawyer expert in matters related to EU competition (in effect, antitrust) law and trade law. Assisting in the presentation by Spinks (standing, at left) were 4 additional Sidley lawyers. From left: Dr. Michele Boggiani, who spoke on anti-corruption and life sciences law, Paul Greaves, on data privacy law, Anne Robert, on competition law, and Dr. Bregt Natens, on trade law.

The day concluded with a lively reception that Sidley kindly hosted. Participants included our students, firm attorneys, Center Director Kathleen A. Doty and myself, Sidley attorneys including Wim Nauwelaerts (LLM’94), an alumnus and head of the firm’s data privacy group, plus other Georgia Law graduates. These included: Johan De Bruycker (LLM’90), General Counsel, Ageas, Brussels; Porter Elliott (JD’96), the Van Bael & Bellis partner who helped secure a room for the morning NATO presentation; Daniel J. Felz (JD’09), an associate at Alston & Bird LLP; Professor Erik Franckxx (LLM’83), Professor of Law Director of the Department of International and European Law at Vrije Universiteit Brussel; and Dr. Christof Siefarth (LLM’86), a partner at GÖRG law firm in Cologne, Germany, and member of our Center’s Council.

Our group returns to Brussels tomorrow, to the Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Science and the Arts, to take part in Reconnect: Reconciling Europe with its Citizens through Democracy and the Rule of Law, a conference kicking off a 4-year-research project among 18 partners, including our partner institution, the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, KU Leuven.

Global Governance Summer School enriches our study abroad tradition

Leuven Dean Bart Kerremans provides statistical analyses of the political economy of the 2017 U.S. and 2017 French presidential elections

LEUVEN and BRUSSELS, Belgium – The 2017 Global Governance Summer School may have ended, but memories linger of a brilliant week in these 2 Belgian cities.

Bicycles line sidewalks all over the University of Leuven, also known as KU Leuven

The 2017 GGSS marked the 1st summer school collaboration between our Dean Rusk International Law Center, University of Georgia School of Law, and our Belgium partner, the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies at the University of Leuven, one of Europe’s premier institutions of higher education since its founding in 1425.

At the same time, it contributed to Georgia Law’s long tradition of summer study in Belgium – a tradition that began in 1973 as the Brussels Seminar led by the late Professor Gabriel N. Wilner and supported by another Georgia Law professor, our Center’s namesake, Dean Rusk. Over the years hundreds of U.S. and European law students took part, sometimes launching careers in global practice. We’re proud to have continued the tradition with this year’s GGSS.

Leuven streetscape

As previously posted, our 2017 GGSS journey began at The Hague, political capital of the Netherlands, where students received professional development briefings at the International Criminal Court, the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, and the International Court of Justice.

The Leuven Institute is housed in the buildings of an Irish College founded in 1607

We then moved to Leuven, a centuries-old Flanders city about 15 miles west of Brussels. The lovely Leuven Institute for Ireland in Europe was our home base for the week of June 25. Days were intense, while summery weather, late-evening sunsets, and endless lanes of historic buildings and convivial sidewalk cafes made for relaxing evenings.

The week began with students taking part in classroom seminars:

Leuven Professor Jan Wouters introduces global governance

Day 1 focused on “Global Governance and International Law: Concepts, Norms, Actors, and Processes,” and featured 4 lectures: “Global Governance: An Introduction” by Leuven Law Professor Jan Wouters, GGSS Co-Director and Leuven Centre Director; “A Classic Account of International Law” by Professor Diane Marie Amann, GGSS Co-Director; “International Organizations as Rulemakers” by Dr. Philip De Man, Leuven Centre Senior Researcher; “Why Global Governance?” by Georgia Law Professor Harlan G. Cohen.

Georgia Law Professor Diane Marie Amann examines relationship between armed conflict and extraction of oil and other natural resources

Day 2 covered “Global Economic and Trade Governance,” with these lectures: “Concepts, Principles, and Issues: Global Economic and Trade Law” by Georgia Law Professor Cohen; “A Legal Perspective on Global Economic and Trade Law” by Leuven Law Professor Geert Van Calster; “International Commercial Responsibility” by Georgia Law Professor Amann; and “A Political Economic Perspective on Global Economic and Trade Governance” by Dean Bart Kerremans, head of Leuven’s Faculty of Social Sciences.

Leiden Professor Horst Fischer surveys human rights institutions

Day 3 shifted to “Global Human Rights, Rule of Law, and Security Governance.” Leiden Law Professor Horst Fischer began with a lecture on “Human Rights Governance”; then followed a lecture on “Rule of Law Governance” by as Dr. Nicolas Hachez, Leuven Centre Senior Researcher. The afternoon kicked off with a conversation on the practice of human rights law between Alison A. Smith, Legal Counsel at the Brussels NGO No Peace Without Justice, and Georgia Law Professor Amann.

Rusk Interim Director Kathleen A. Doty summarizes arms control law to prepare students for treaty negotiation exercise

Our Center’s Interim Director, Kathleen A. Doty, then led the GGSS students’ simulated negotiation of a treaty aimed at controlling the use of drones. The day concluded with a dialogue between Leuven Law Professor Dominik Steiger and Georgia Law Professor Cohen on “Withdrawal from International Organizations and Global Governance.”

These classroom sessions prepared students for Day 4, an expert conference on “International Law and Global Governance in Turbulent Times.”

Dr. Tom Pegram, University College London, addresses conference as panelists and other participants look on

Taking part in the 1st conference panel, “Global Governance of Human Rights,” were: Georgia Law Professor Amann; Leuven Centre researcher Anna-Luise Chané; Mercedes García Pérez, Head of Division-Human Rights, European External Action Service; Dr. Tom Pegram, Senior Lecturer, University College London; and Katrien Meuwissen, Development Officer, European Network of National Human Rights Institutions.

Speaking at the conference panel on “Global Governance of Democracy and Rule of Law” were: Bologna Political Science Professor Daniela Piana; Leuven Researcher Dr. Mattieu Burnay; Professor Laurent Pech, Middlesex University London; Leuven researcher Tim Courthaut; and Dr. Petra Bard of the Central European University-Budapest.

Georgia Law Professor Harlan G. Cohen (3d from right) speaks on developments in international trade

Closing the conference was a panel on “Global Economic and Trade Governance in Protectionist Times,” featuring Professor Miles Kahler, American University; Professor John Kirton, University of Toronto; Georgia Law Professor Cohen; Tomas Baert, European Commission, Head of Unit Trade Strategy; Professor Jean-Christophe Defraigne, Université Saint-Louis Bruxelles; and Professor Pieter de Wilde, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

GGSS concluded with a day in Brussels, capital of Belgium and home to many European and international legal institutions.

At NATO HQ in Brussels on final day of Global Governance Summer School: from left, Nils Okeson, Brian Griffin, Jennifer Cotton, Wade Herring, Nicholas Duffey, James Cox, Kathleen A. Doty, Kristopher Kobl, Lyddy O’Brien, Casey Callaghan, Ezra Thompson, Diane Marie Amann, Evans Horsley, and Eduard Snijders

Students took a morning tour of the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. There they learned about the work of NATO’s lawyers from member of the NATO Office of Legal Affairs, headed by Steven Hill. They lunched among NATO staffers and uniformed personnel from NATO’s 29 member states.

Alumnus Stephen Spinks briefs students on global legal practice

In Brussels’ “European quarter,” students stopped at the European Parliamentarium and then took part in a briefing at Sidley Austin LLP, a global law firm whose law practice all manner of global law fields, including trade, environment, life sciences, data privacy, and dispute settlement. Leading the briefing (right) was the managing partner of Sidley’s Brussels office, Stephen O. Spinks, who is a Georgia Law alumnus and member of our Dean Rusk International Law Center Council. As Spinks told student, he himself had studied in GGSS’ forerunner, the Brussels Seminar. He returned after receiving his J.D. degree, earned a master’s degree at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and began his career as a specialist in trade and competition/antitrust, law. Sprinks’ inspiring story capped a great week for students, many of whom are spending the balance of summer at Global Externships.

Poster outside the Koninklijk Paleis van Brussel, or Royal Palace of Brussels

Belgian Consul General de Baets featured at Global Atlanta luncheon

willem

Pictured at front, from right: Belgian Consul General William de Baets and Phil Bolton and Trevor Williams, respectively, publisher and managing editor of Global Atlanta.

For decades, we at the University of Georgia School of Law have welcomed collaboration with Belgium and its people and institutions. Even before 1978, when Belgium’s national airline became the 1st foreign carrier to fly nonstop to Atlanta, a Belgian attorney became the 1st foreign-trained lawyer to earn Georgia Law’s Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree. And thanks to the hard work and generosity of Georgia Law professors like Gabriel Wilner and our Center’s namesake, former U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk, we’ve partnered with leading Belgian universities to offer summer seminars on issues related to international  law and policy, often with a focus on European Union and transatlantic cooperation. That tradition will continue via this summer’s global governance school at the home of our partner, the Leuven Centre for Global Governance at the University of Leuven, one of Europe’s premier research institutions.

Thus it was a special pleasure to attend last Friday’s “Consular Conversations: Luncheon Interview With Belgium’s Consul General,” held at the Atlanta office of Miller & Martin, where Tom Harrold, Georgia Law alumnus and member of our Dean Rusk International Law Center Council, leads the International/World downloadLaw practice group. The event was part of a series of conversations sponsored by another Center partner, Global Atlanta.

Guest of honor was William de Baets, who’s served since last April as Belgium’s top diplomat in the Southeastern United States. In a wide-ranging conversation with Phil Bolton and Trevor Williams, Global Atlanta’s publisher and managing editor, de Baets explained he’d joined Belgium’s foreign service following 9 years as a Navy officer. Postings before his arrival at Atlanta included deputy head of mission in Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, and Venezuela, and political counselor at Belgium’s embassy in Washington, D.C.

De Baets said that his office provides consular services and also engages in public and economy diplomacy; Friday’s conversation fulfilled the latter role. He spoke to a full house – a testament to the fact that Belgium ranks among the top 10 foreign investors in Georgia, which is home to more than 70 Belgian companies and more than 5,000 Belgian nationals.

Asked about Belgium’s renown as the home of Tintin and the Smurfs, not to mention 20th C. surrealists like René Magritte, de Baets recalled an artistic tradition that reaches back to the 16th C. Flemish master, Peter Paul Rubens. Additionally, Belgium did not gain independence until 1830; before that “the territory kept changing hands and was ruled by other people,” he noted. “We couldn’t speak up too much. We were saying yes and thinking no, or saying yes and doing what we wanted to do. It was a source of our humor – we couldn’t take ourselves too seriously.”

Again answering a question, de Baets spoke of his father’s participation in the resistance during Germany’s occupation of Belgium during World War II.

Flags of the 28 NATO member countries

Conversation then turned to Belgium’s role in contemporary matters. Regarding Brussels-based NATO (right), the defense alliance established 68 years ago by the North Atlanta Treaty, de Baets noted apparent disagreement within the new U.S. administration. Indeed, earlier in the week the South Carolina Governor tapped to become U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, had called NATO “important.”

Although the United States can defend itself without NATO, Europe cannot, and so de Baets advocated strengthening the European Union’s security pillar to offset any weakening of NATO. Such alliances are essential for countries like Belgium and its neighbor, Luxembourg. Yet de Baets acknowledged difficulty in achieving the goal, given disagreement among EU member states – including Britain, even before its people voted in favor of Brexit.

Dubbing compromise a “Belgian export,” de Baets indicated that his country could a key role in aiding Europe’s efforts to resolve crises in financial and security sectors, as well as migration. The goal, he said, is to “strengthen our security without giving up our values.”

Honoring the Hon. Ural Glanville (JD’87), global public servant

glanville_2015Featured yesterday at CNN: a Georgia Law grad whose public service has spanned the globe.

He’s the Honorable Ural Glanville, who earned his Juris Doctor degree in 1987. Not only is he a long-time Judge on the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, but he’s also served as a top lawyer in the U.S. Army Reserve. (photo credit) CNN’s Octavio Blanco wrote that Judge Glanville

is the first African-American Army Reserve Judge Advocate to be promoted to the rank of General Officer.

His military posts have included: Brigadier General, Chief Judge (IMA) U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and Commanding General of the NATO Rule of Law Support Mission/Rule of Law Field Force in Afghanistan. He’s done tours there and in Kuwait, earned a master’s degree in strategic studies from the U.S. Army War College, and served as an adjunct professor  in the United States and in Europe.

The CNN article, Unlikely recruit becomes top legal adviser in the U.S. Army, details these achievements and the long road that Judge Glanville traveled – a road that, we’re honored to note, brought him to Athens for his undergraduate studies in history and his law degree.

Cutting-edge law: Georgia-Leuven Global Governance Summer School

For students everywhere, we are delighted to announce a new opportunity to global study law and policy:

RuskStudiesAbroad_postcard_cropped2

Applications are welcome for a brand-new Global Governance Summer School (GGSS), spanning 3 weeks at the University of Leuven, located just minutes from Belgium’s main airport. Students in law and related disciplines, from the United States, Europe, and across the globe, are welcome to enroll. All students will receive a certificate, and U.S. law students also may earn 4 American Bar Association-approved credits.

GGSS launches a new partnership between the Dean Rusk International Law Center, University of Georgia School of Law – which has sponsored summer study abroad in Belgium since 1973 – and the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies at the University of Leuven, one of Belgium’s premier research institutions.

Cutting-edge issues will be explored July 10-30, 2016, through 4 courses, all taught in English by leading experts in regional, transnational, and international law and policy:

wouters_janGlobal Governance Overview: GGSS Co-Director Jan Wouters (left), Jean Monnet Chair ad personam EU and Global Governance, Director of the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies

Global Human Rights & Security Governance: GGSS Co-Director Diane Marie Amann (right), Associate Dean for International Programs & Strategic Initiatives and Emily & Ernest Woodruff Chair in International Law, Dean Rusk International Law Center, University of Georgia School of LawcropCohen_harlan_columns2012

Global Economic Governance: Harlan Grant Cohen (left), Associate Professor of Law, University of Georgia School of Law, and Managing Editor, AJIL Unboundaxel

Global Governance Practicum: Dr. Axel Marx (left), Deputy Director, Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, and Kathleen A. Doty (below right), Associate Director for Global Practice Preparation, Dean Rusk International Law Center, University of kate - CopyGeorgia School of Law

Pivotal to GGSS is a 2-day experts conference to be held at Leuven’s campus in the center of Brussels, capital of Belgium and numerous European Union agencies.

Also supplementing formal study will be professional development trips to the headquarters of the North
europarl_bruxAtlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Parliament (left) in Brussels, as well as the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. Rounding out the GGSS offerings will be an optional trip to Flanders Fields, formerly a site of battle and now the resting place of many World War I combatants of all nationalities.

Deadline for applications is Monday, April 4, 2016. Details here; U.S.-based students, apply here. All others, including U.S.-based students seeking more information, should contact Kathleen A. Doty, doty[at]uga[dot]edu.