Today, Explained: "Wars Have Rules" Episode Summary

Podcast Information:

• Title: Today, Explained
• Host/Author: Vox
• Description: A daily news explainer podcast guiding listeners through the most important stories of the day.
• Episode: Wars Have Rules
• Release Date: June 26, 2025

1. Introduction to International Humanitarian Law

Noel King begins the episode by reflecting on the devastation of World War II, which resulted in the deaths of approximately 60 million people. This unprecedented loss spurred the creation of international humanitarian law (IHL), an effort to ensure that while wars might still occur, certain actions within them are prohibited to prevent future atrocities.

“[...] We built a legal infrastructure, we called it international humanitarian law that essentially said this. You can wage a war, but while you are waging a war, there are certain things you can't do.”
— Noel King [00:02]

The establishment of IHL included the designation of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, along with the creation of courts to prosecute those who violate these laws. The underlying belief was that this legal framework, though imperfect, could mitigate the horrors of war.

2. The Erosion of International Humanitarian Law in the Gaza Conflict

The discussion shifts to the recent conflict involving Hamas's attack on Israel and Israel's subsequent military response in Gaza. Noel King highlights how this situation has tested the robustness of the established legal infrastructure.

“Then came Hamas's attack on Israel and Israel's war in Gaza. And that legal infrastructure fell apart.”
— Noel King [00:02]

Susie Hanson, a journalist and writer for New York Magazine, delves into whether Hamas's actions qualify as war crimes or genocide.

“People can debate those things, but I would say yes, generally people do agree that the attack on October 7th was a war crime.”
— Susie Hanson [02:17]

While there's consensus that Hamas's attack constitutes a war crime, the classification as genocide remains debatable.

3. Israel's Military Response: Adherence to International Law?

The focus shifts to Israel's military actions over the past 90 weeks and their compliance with IHL.

“Has Israel followed international humanitarian law?”
— Noel King [02:40]

Susie Hanson outlines the contentious aspects of Israel's response, emphasizing deprivation and starvation as potential war crimes. She points to the withholding of food, water, electricity, and fuel from Gaza as deliberate actions that contravene IHL.

“Israel has been accused of withholding food, water, cutting off electricity, withholding fuel... As of May 2024, no one can leave.”
— Susie Hanson [02:40]

Additionally, the indiscriminate bombing campaign targeting civilians, including women and children, raises significant concerns about the proportionality and intent behind Israel's military objectives.

“These absolutely lethal bombing campaigns... target civilians, women, children... the tolerance for killing in this war seems to be off the charts.”
— Susie Hanson [03:49]

4. International Criminal Court (ICC) Actions and Legal Proceedings

In May 2024, Karim Khan, the ICC prosecutor, issued warrants for three Hamas leaders and two Israeli leaders, including Benjamin Netanyahu, on charges of war crimes.

“My office submits that there are reasonable grounds to believe that these three Hamas leaders are criminally responsible for the killing of Israeli civilians...”
— Karim Khan [06:00]

Susie Hanson discusses the implications of these warrants, highlighting the challenges in apprehending leaders like Netanyahu due to practical and political barriers.

“These are warrants. And so that means that they would have to be arrested or submit to being arrested. And I think that the problem is that it's very difficult to apprehend these leaders.”
— Susie Hanson [06:19]

Furthermore, South Africa brought charges to the International Court of Justice alleging that Israel was committing genocide. While the court found it plausible that genocide was occurring, it did not definitively label the actions as genocide or order a ceasefire.

“The judges released a ruling that it was plausible that genocide was happening...”
— Susie Hanson [07:41]

Despite these legal efforts, Susie expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of these institutions in halting ongoing atrocities.

5. The Role of the United States and International Institutions

Noel King and Susie Hanson explore how international bodies and key nations, particularly the United States, have influenced the conflict and the enforcement of international laws.

“The United States has been supporting this war and it has been blocking any efforts to even bring a ceasefire.”
— Susie Hanson [09:12]

Omer Bartov, a professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Brown University, further explains the U.S. stance:

“The United States has taken the very clear position since this conflict began that Israel has a right to defend itself.”
— Omer Bartov [09:05]

This unwavering support has contributed to the paralysis of international institutions like the United Nations, which faces obstruction in passing resolutions aimed at mitigating the conflict.

6. Expert Analysis: Is Israel Committing Genocide?

Omer Bartov provides an in-depth analysis of whether Israel's actions in Gaza meet the criteria for genocide. Initially, in an op-ed, Bartov argued that the situation did not meet the UN's definition of genocide, but his perspective evolved as the conflict persisted.

“I felt that evidence became undeniable in early May 2024.”
— Omer Bartov [14:27]

Bartov cites the systematic destruction of infrastructure, displacement of civilians, and the targeting of essential services as indicative of an intent to destroy the Palestinian population as a group. The staggering death toll, especially among children, and the long-term trauma inflicted upon survivors further support his conclusion.

“When you put all of that together... then it's very hard to call this anything but an attempt to destroy the ability of that group, and that group is made up of Palestinians to survive as a group.”
— Omer Bartov [17:06]

7. Israel's Defense and Global Perception

Israel vehemently denies accusations of genocide, associating the term with the Holocaust and rejecting its applicability to their actions in Gaza.

“In Israel, if you use the G word, everyone gets very uncomfortable because genocide is associated with the Holocaust.”
— Omer Bartov [18:35]

The Israeli government contends that their military actions are necessary to combat Hamas, which they accuse of using civilians as human shields and manipulating the population to prevent decisive military victories.

“The Israeli media is saying that there is no other way to destroy Hamas... if Hamas were to return the hostages, then Gaza would be immediately completely destroyed.”
— Omer Bartov [20:44]

This stance has led to widespread international criticism, particularly regarding the humanitarian impact on Gaza's civilian population.

8. The Future of International Humanitarian Law and Accountability

Noel King and Omer Bartov discuss the limitations of the current legal framework and the challenges in enforcing accountability for war crimes and genocide.

“The enforcement agency, the UN is dysfunctional. The United States is standing in the way.”
— Noel King [21:55]

Despite the issuance of ICC warrants, the practical avenues for prosecution remain constrained. Omer Bartov remains cautiously pessimistic about short-term outcomes but holds hope for long-term changes in international relations and accountability standards.

“I've always said. I'm pretty hopeless in the short run. In the long run, things change.”
— Omer Bartov [22:51]

He emphasizes that the current conflict challenges the very foundation of international law established post-World War II, potentially catalyzing a reevaluation of global responses to such crises.

Conclusion

The episode "Wars Have Rules" from Today, Explained provides a comprehensive analysis of the ongoing conflict between Hamas and Israel, scrutinizing the adherence to and breakdown of international humanitarian laws. Through expert interviews and detailed discussions, the podcast highlights the complexities of prosecuting war crimes, the influential role of international powers, and the profound human cost of the conflict. The episode underscores the urgent need for effective enforcement mechanisms to uphold the principles established to prevent atrocities in the aftermath of World War II.

Notable Quotes:

• “We built a legal infrastructure, we called it international humanitarian law that essentially said this. You can wage a war, but while you are waging a war, there are certain things you can't do.”
  — Noel King [00:02]

• “People can debate those things, but I would say yes, generally people do agree that the attack on October 7th was a war crime.”
  — Susie Hanson [02:17]

• “These absolutely lethal bombing campaigns... target civilians, women, children... the tolerance for killing in this war seems to be off the charts.”
  — Susie Hanson [03:49]

• “We are fighting animals and acting accordingly.”
  — Omer Bartov [03:51]

• “I've always said. I'm pretty hopeless in the short run. In the long run, things change.”
  — Omer Bartov [22:51]

Additional Information

Produced by: Victoria Chamberlain
Edited by: Jolie Meyers
Senior Researcher: Laura Bullard
Engineers: Andrea Christensdotter and Patrick Boyd
Hosts: Noel King and Omer Bartov

Support for Today, Explained: This summary omits advertisements and promotional content to focus solely on the episode's substantive discussions.