Towards a War of Norms ? From Lawfare to Legal Operations
Defined as the use of law to establish, perpetuate, or change power relations in order to counter an adversary, lawfare practices reflect a reality that is inherent in international law.
Resulting from compromises between states, international law expresses political-strategic power relations that lawfare seeks to manipulate in four main ways:
- adjusting legal constraints by reinterpreting existing norms
- establishing new norms through legal lobbying as a power strategy
- mobilizing legal effects to coerce an actor through strategic litigation
- using law as a reputational weapon
Although lawfare is controversial when understood as a misuse of the rule of law, it is now being institutionalized. While states do not claim direct responsibility for acts of lawfare, the increasing use of legal vectors to achieve political-strategic ends is a notable feature of the disruptions at work in the international system. States have always used the law for strategic purposes, but recent developments—the proliferation of courts of justice, the increasing media coverage of conflicts, and the growing confusion between legality and legitimacy—tend to favor a greater instrumentalization of the law.
This content is available in French: Vers une guerre des normes ? Du lawfare aux opérations juridiques.
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Towards a War of Norms ? From Lawfare to Legal Operations
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programsFind out more
Discover all our analysesThe Nuanced Relationship Between Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Public sentiment is something decision-makers must contend with, especially in democratic states. However, the extent to which public opinion shapes foreign policy varies. Three Council of Councils experts in France, India, and Nigeria reflect on how public opinion does—and sometimes does not—affect foreign policy decisions.
Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
How does France’s nuclear deterrent contribute to the defense of Europe?
France’s nuclear deterrent, serving first and foremost to defend France’s vital interests, also contributes to the defense of Europe. This contribution has been recognized within the North Atlantic Alliance since 1974, but remains little known. In a speech closely followed by France’s European partners and its adversaries alike, President Emmanuel Macron announced a new concept for French nuclear deterrence: “forward deterrence” (dissuasion avancée). This article aims to explain the origins of this concept, outline its main pillars, and describe the partnerships that are sought. It then discusses the relationship with the U.S. doctrine of “extended deterrence”, and finally offers some ethical considerations.
Fury from the Skies. A Strategic Analysis of Air Campaign against Iran
What is the outcome of Operations Roaring Lion (RL) and Epic Fury (EF), launched by Israel and the United States against the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, 2026?