Samuel Moyn, Henry R Luce Professor of Jurisprudence at Yale Law School and Professor of History at Yale University, will give a lecture at the School in honour of Professor Henry Shue. He will survey Leo Tolstoy’s still-relevant criticism of attempts to make war more humane through international law. Tolstoy's criticism remained constant despite shifting reasons and the almost total change in his career, and he argued for the pursuit of alternatives to 'more humane' war. The lecture will conclude by assessing the relevance of Tolstoy’s attack on humane war to the 'forever wars' of today.

Treaties are categorical as to the limited competencies of the European Union when it comes to health policy. However, this statement is not true for complementary and supplementary health insurance, which accounts in several European countries for a significant share of health expenditures – and when it is even the main provider of care for some benefits. In this respect, private (usually voluntary) health insurance has been fundamentally transformed by a series of European directives and regulations over the last thirty years.

Dr Branwen Gruffydd Jones, Reader in International Relations at the University of Cardiff’s School of Law and Politics, will discuss the life and internationalist thought of Amílcar Cabral (1924-1973), who was a Bissau-Guinean and Cape Verdean intellectual, poet, theoretician, revolutionary, political organiser, diplomat and nationalist. Having led one of the most successful wars of independence in modern African history, Cabral was an inspiration to revolutionary socialists and independence movements globally.

The notions of hybrid warfare and hybrid threats, together with the related concept of grey zone warfare, continue to feature prominently in current strategic debates. The purpose of this seminar is to explore the legal dimension of these ideas. Collectively, they draw our attention to a set of legal challenges presented by the use of coercive measures below the threshold of force and armed attack and, more generally, to the hostile instrumentalization of law in pursuit of geopolitical objectives.

How are newly enfranchised groups mobilized? I theorize that new electorates are `harder to mobilize', which incentivizes politicians to expend resources on the mobilization of most new electorates in fewer, more geographically concentrated, localities. This results in a greater within-country variation in turnout of new electorates and reduces the difference between turnout of new and established electorates in places with the strongest incentives to engage in mobilization efforts.