AJI_114_2_BookReviews 327..331


RECENT BOOKS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW

EDITED BY RICHARD B. BILDER

BOOK REVIEWS

Research Handbook on Feminist Engagement
in International Law. Edited by Susan
Harris Rimmer and Kate Ogg.
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar,
2019. Pp. xxvii, 558. Index.
doi:10.1017/ajil.2020.10

Susan Harris Rimmer, associate professor at
Griffith University Law School, and Kate Ogg,
senior lecturer at Australian National University
College of Law, have compiled an important vol-
ume on feminist engagement with international
law. The editors build on recent research and
scholarship produced on the subject, but also
extend their inquiries to areas not previously cov-
ered by feminist scholars of international law in
great detail, but which are of significance to the
corpus of international law scholarship.

The publication of this volume is an ambitious
project—for its scope and reach (including pub-
lic and private international law); its contributors
(a global collection of knowledgeable and
engaged scholars); its approach (incorporating
theory and practice); and its methodological ori-
entation (involving both quantitative and quali-
tative approaches). The volume incorporates a
range of diverse perspectives. More than thirty
contributors were drawn from invited submis-
sions as well as an open call for participants,
resulting in a globally representative group of
submissions, with contributing authors at differ-
ent stages of their careers. To bridge theory and
practice, each section of the volume includes a
contribution from a practitioner of international
law.

The organization of the book is particularly
helpful. The conceptual orientation is about
building and strengthening prior international

legal scholarship, attempting to fill the gaps and
omissions in such scholarship, incorporating and
engaging with other critical theories, and pursu-
ing an approach that is impactful and meaningful
to women’s lives. Although the majority of the
contributors appear to have been trained in law,
almost all have academic orientation or ground-
ing in other disciplines as well, making the
approach richly interdisciplinary.

A valuable inclusion in the introductory dis-
cussion is an empirical review of feminist interna-
tional legal scholarship’s contribution to
international law, especially the field’s reach
and influence, as well as its diversity and inclu-
sion of varying (and sometimes conflicting) view-
points. Harris Rimmer and Ogg provide a useful
catalogue of feminist contributions to the field of
international law between 1950 and 2016. At the
same time, they succeed in dispelling some of the
conflicting perspectives regarding feminist schol-
arship in international law’s disproportionate
focus on violence against women, as well as con-
cerns raised about the ghettoization of feminist
legal scholarship. The empirical data they provide
is impressive, but the data also suggests the hard
work that still needs to be done to achieve the
goals of gender equality and women’s empower-
ment—at the global and national level.

The introduction notes the contribution of
feminist approaches to international law, weigh-
ing the success of the contributions (their impact
on international law) as well as the limitations or
obstacles to the achievement of gender equality in
international law, including its institutions and
structures. The editors point out how feminist
legal scholars have created the discursive space
in the legal and political realm to influence inter-
national law. They also demonstrate how those
scholars have brought women’s issues from the
margins of discourse to a more centralized space

Copyright © 2020 by The American Society of International Law

327



of recognition, at least formally. But they lament
the disappointments and the lack of progress in
crucial areas of international law.

Regarding the successes of feminist interna-
tional law scholars since the start of the new mil-
lennium, Harris Rimmer and Ogg point to the
2002 Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court, especially the inclusion of sexual
violence in the definition of crimes against
humanity. Between 2000 and 2015, the United
Nations passed eight resolutions on women,
peace, and security, as well as creating UN
Women in 2010, which is seen as the UN’s
global engine for gender equality and women’s
empowerment. They also point to regional
gains, such as the 2003 Maputo Protocol on
the Rights of Women in Africa and the 2014
Council of Europe Convention on Preventing
and Combating Violence Against Women and
Domestic Violence. At the time of the book’s
publication, seven women had been awarded
the Nobel Peace for their endeavors related to
human rights, democracy, and peace-building.

Harris Rimmer and Ogg particularly highlight
the growing influence of feminist legal scholar-
ship in the academy, including the proliferation
of international law courses and related academic
activities generated by such scholarship. To this
list of successes I would add the impressive wom-
en’s advocacy at the global and local level, includ-
ing the large number of nongovernmental
organizations dedicated to gender equality and
women’s empowerment. Of particular signifi-
cance is the emergence in 2017 of the #MeToo
movement, whose influence and impact are yet
to be examined.

The editors also point to many disappoint-
ments, despite the successes noted above. For
example, the UN has to date failed to appoint a
woman as secretary-general, despite the availabil-
ity of several prominent women to serve in this
role. In addition, the number of women at the
senior level throughout the UN system remains
paltry. In addition, at the national level, men
with deeply sexist and misogynistic attitudes
have been elected as political leaders in several
countries.

Harris Rimmer and Ogg also point to a con-
tradiction: a growing despondency about the lim-
ited influence of feminists at the international law
level, despite the proliferation of feminist legal
scholarship. And they also note the ongoing
debates about feminism as being dominated by
Western feminists and therefore still largely dem-
ographically homogenous. Further, they refer to
Janet Halley’s exhortation that international law-
yers should take a break from feminism.1

This tabulation of gains and disappointments
raise several issues for the editors, notably the
inclusion of diverse perspectives (such as critical
race theory, third world feminism, and queer the-
ory) into feminist critiques of international law;
whether having women in senior positions will
make a fundamental difference to the structure
and edifice of international law, as opposed to
mere tinkering at the edges; and whether the
focus of feminist legal scholars should move
beyond the widely covered areas of human rights
law, which are often erroneously interpreted as
“soft” law.

The four goals that the authors set out for the
volume, highlighted below, are pursued through-
out the volume and arranged into four parts. The
first goal is diversifying the feminist perspectives
on international law, especially in areas that have
none or have limited engagement with feminist
perspectives. Second, the volume seeks to engage
with a wider audience and therefore render fem-
inist perspectives on international law more
influential. The third goal is to find strategies
for feminist scholarship that may be translated
into productive ways to change women’s lives.
Fourth, the contributors are invited to engage
with racial and other critiques that have vexed
the feminist legal theory project.

The introductory keynote address of Sima
Samar, Afghan women’s and human rights advo-
cate, (ch. 2) bestows on the volume a kind of
gravitas that signals both admirable achievements
as well as continuing disappointments.

Part 1, “Diversifying Feminist Engagement
with International Law,” lays the groundwork

1 JANET HALLEY, SPLIT DECISIONS: HOW AND WHY TO
TAKE A BREAK FROM FEMINISM (2006).

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW328 Vol. 114:2



for the rest of the volume, with contributors pur-
suing new horizons of international law. Several
contributions engage with areas of international
law not generally well traversed or influenced
by feminist legal theory. From Harris Rimmer’s
interrogation of the “social activity” of diplomacy
by states and the theorizing of gender and diplo-
macy (ch. 3) to a range of analyses on environ-
mental concerns, climate change, and natural
disasters, the contributors engage with areas of
law largely untouched by feminist legal theory.
In different ways and from a range of perspec-
tives, each of the contributors point to the possi-
bilities of feminist methodologies and a feminist
ontology to reimagine these areas of law.

In the discussion of some of the chapters, there
is resourceful reference to national law analogues.
For example, in her chapter examining the com-
plete absence of feminist analysis of private inter-
national law, Mary Keyes, professor at Griffith
University Law School, ponders whether “there
is nothing to be said about women in private
international law,” or that “[women] are not
involved in, or at least not especially affected
by, private international law” (ch. 7, p. 103).
She appropriately locates these absences in the
gendered analytical gaps in the common law
within countries, especially when it comes to
family law and the law of contract.

It is therefore hard to raise substantive criti-
cisms of this volume. Very often in texts of this
kind, namely feminist legal approaches, the spec-
ter of essentialism looms large. Although an
essentialist critique may be apposite in some of
the chapters, in fact quite a few contributors grap-
ple with the idea of a range of perspectives that
include those of women. Some are mindful of
the challenge of attributing one viewpoint to all
women as a homogenous group. For example,
Rowena Maguire, senior lecturer at Queensland
University of Technology School of Law,
explores a range and diversity of feminist
approaches in her chapter on climate law and pol-
icy, recognizing that “a range of feminist theories
and perspectives are useful in exploring the gen-
der and climate nexus” (ch. 5, p. 64). So too Jaya
Ramji-Nogales, associate dean for academic
affairs and professor at Temple University

Beasley School of Law, revisits the category
“women” in Part 2 to “demonstrate the promise
and peril of using the category “women” as the
foundation of a political movement” since she
notes that “‘women’ constitutes a diverse group
with different and at times diametrically opposed
political perspectives” (ch. 14, p. 241).

Another general critique of feminist legal
theory’s contributions has been the lack of a thor-
ough appreciation of the totality of women’s expe-
rience of subordination and oppression, and
consequently the limitations of feminist legal the-
orytoaddresssuchtotality.Inthisrespect,thecon-
tributors to Part 3 of the volume, entitled
“Feminist Engagement with International Law:
Improving Women’s Lives,” confront these con-
cerns in creative and thoughtful ways, recognizing
the interconnectedness of social and economic
rights with civil and political rights. One of the
longstanding critiques of feminist legal theory
approaches to international law has been its over-
sized attention to questions of violence against
women, without an appreciation of the structural
violence of poverty and economic inequalities and
indignities.2

All the contributors to Part 3 appreciate the
larger critique and incorporate those perspectives
in their analysis. Beth Goldblatt, professor at the
University of Technology Sydney, is particularly
effective in highlighting the connections between
poverty and violence (ch. 21). Similarly, Emma
Larking, visiting research fellow at Australian
National University, adopts a macroeconomic
comprehensive approach to highlight global
and systemic economic problems that are
designed to reify gendered inequalities (ch. 18).

Part 4 of the volume, entitled “Building
Bridges with Other Critical Theories,” makes a
strong contribution to the idea of inclusivity,
which animates much of the analysis in this

2 Sandra Fredman, Women and Poverty: A Human
Rights Approach (Working Paper No. 2, 2015), available
at https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/
uploads/2015/07/OxHRH-Working-Paper-Number-
2-Fredman1.pdf; Berta E. Hernández-Truyol, Women’s
Rights as Human Rights: Rules, Realities and the Role of
Culture: A Formula for Reform, 21 BROOK. J. INT’L L.
605 (1996), available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/
papers.cfm?abstract_id¼2687514.

RECENT BOOKS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW2020 329

https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OxHRH-Working-Paper-Number-2-Fredman1.pdf
https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OxHRH-Working-Paper-Number-2-Fredman1.pdf
https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OxHRH-Working-Paper-Number-2-Fredman1.pdf
https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OxHRH-Working-Paper-Number-2-Fredman1.pdf
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687514
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687514
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687514
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687514


volume, and also directly dispels the concerns of
feminist essentialism mentioned earlier. Even
though a few contributors in the other sections
also engage with critical theories beyond femi-
nism, the contributors to this section of the vol-
ume engage in a robust dialogue with some of the
major critiques of feminism. Those critiques have
centered on the Eurocentric origins and tenden-
cies of feminism and its claims of universality in
the face of local contestations, especially around
religion or cultural norms. The contribution of
Kathryn McNeilly, senior lecturer at Queen’s
University Belfast School of Law, explores the
queering of international law, and makes the
appeal that “human rights themselves must be
approached as fluid, non-binarised and multitu-
dinous” (ch. 25, p. 430). From Howard
University Associate Professor Jarpa Dawuni’s
perch as an African woman inviting a reframe
of feminist questions, “a new conceptual frame-
work aimed at charting a different direction for
the study of women in international law” (ch.
26, p. 445) to University of Cape Coast Faculty
of Law Lecturer Veronica P. Fynn Bruey’s atten-
tion to the concerns of indigenous women in
international law (ch. 29), this section is a clarion
call to reshape the lens of international law by a
critical feminist perspective that embraces the
intersectionality and interconnectedness of wom-
en’s multiple identities.

The different parts of the book fit together
well, although several chapters within the differ-
ent sections could just as well have been placed
elsewhere. This is an observation, not a criticism,
since the four themes are interconnected on so
many levels. The choices of the editors, Ogg
and Harris Rimmer, in parsing out the various
sections to give the broader thematic impetus is
quite effective. As a research handbook the vol-
ume covers almost all the bases, from diversifica-
tion of the field, to pushing for influence on a
broader scale, including embracing a range of
critical theories, and ultimately providing inno-
vative perspectives to make a real difference in
women’s lives. The various chapters in this vol-
ume also invite further explorations, which
reflect the tradition and hallmark of feminist

legal theory, namely, an ongoing and recurring
inquiry of women’s realities.

The book faces two challenges which are only
addressed tangentially. The first is an apparently
global retreat from the utopian and cosmopolitan
vision underlying the possibilities of constitu-
tionalism and law to be transformative, especially
regarding gender equality. It seems like the ascen-
sion of global constitutionalism, so widely hailed
in the wake of the fall of the Berlin Wall, has now
largely abated. Arguably, in the last few years
there has been an emergence of an “authoritarian
constitutionalism”3 and what has been termed
“autocratic legalism.”4 Although these develop-
ments are most pronounced at the national
level, their global resonances are profound and
could have a deep impact on international law
and some of the (limited) gains of feminism.

In this regard, the thoughtful chapter by
Aoifee O’Donoghue, professor at Durham
University, and Ruth Houghton, lecturer at
Newcastle University Law School, which raises
the question whether global constitutionalism
could be feminist, might have been a good
place to think through the implications of the
current context (ch. 6). Their seven-point mani-
festo is compelling, but one wonders whether the
global constitutional frame has shifted some-
what, and how feminist perspectives might
impact or influence this shift.

The second challenge is a perennial one,
namely about transforming legal rights and
legal power into political power. The feminist
legal theoretical gains, as mentioned elsewhere,
have been quite impressive. But ultimately the
legal gains must be translated into fundamental
political power. Despite extraordinary gains, all
indicators still point to women globally as

3 Gábor Halmai, Populism, Authoritarianism and
Constitutionalism, 20 GER. L.J. 296 (2019), available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-jour-
nal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutional-
ism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-
reader.

4 Kim Lane Scheppele, Autocratic Legalism,
EUR. U. INST.: CONSTITUTIONALISM AND POL. BLOG
(2017), at https://blogs.eui.eu/constitutionalism-poli-
tics-working-group/populist-constitutionalism-6-kim-
lane-scheppele-autocratic-legalism.

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW330 Vol. 114:2

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutionalism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-reader
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutionalism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-reader
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutionalism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-reader
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutionalism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-reader
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/populism-authoritarianism-and-constitutionalism/344BB7C4B6D417DE3FB6ECE50B5B1386/core-reader
https://blogs.eui.eu/constitutionalism-politics-working-group/populist-constitutionalism-6-kim-lane-scheppele-autocratic-legalism
https://blogs.eui.eu/constitutionalism-politics-working-group/populist-constitutionalism-6-kim-lane-scheppele-autocratic-legalism
https://blogs.eui.eu/constitutionalism-politics-working-group/populist-constitutionalism-6-kim-lane-scheppele-autocratic-legalism
https://blogs.eui.eu/constitutionalism-politics-working-group/populist-constitutionalism-6-kim-lane-scheppele-autocratic-legalism


second-class citizens. In fact, the World
Economic Forum’s 2018 Global Gender Gap
report states that it will take 202 years for
women to achieve economic equality with men.5

This considerable collection of feminist per-
spectives is akin to a theoretical smorgasbord,
an intellectual buffet offering a wide variety of
ideas tinged with complexities, challenges, and
possibilities. Like a smorgasbord, the variety of
offerings cater to different preferences and tastes,
and allows for dipping in and out, choosing to
start at the beginning, middle, or end. For
those who teach, research, practice, or otherwise
engage with international law, this volume is a
useful source and a notable contribution to the
literature.

PENELOPE ANDREWS
New York Law School

Internationalized Armed Conflicts in
International Law. By Kubo Mačák.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,
2018. Pp. xl, 268. Index.
doi:10.1017/ajil.2020.2

Internationalized Armed Conflicts in
International Law addresses the transformation
of a noninternational armed conflict into an
international one—which the author refers to
as its “internationalization” (p. 24). The matter
is one of increasing importance in recent decades,
given the growing tendency of states to become
involved in one way or another in internal con-
flicts in another state, or the possibility that a
civil conflict may result in the transformation of
warring factions into separate warring states.
Although international law has been evolving to
apply more of the international law of armed con-
flict to internal conflicts, significant differences
nonetheless remain, and it is therefore important
to assess when the process of “internationaliza-
tion” crosses the line, and what the consequences
of that transformation are.

Kubo Mačák is an associate professor at the
University of Exeter Law School and has,
among other things, worked at the
International Criminal Tribunals for the former
Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and has done research
at the International Committee of the Red
Cross and the Max Planck Institute. His scholarly
background is evident in the thoroughness and
rigor of his analysis in this book.

The process of internationalization. The first
half of the book deals with the process by
which noninternational conflicts may become
international. Macak’s analysis stays within the
current structure of the law that provides for
two regimes—one for international conflicts
and another for noninternational conflicts—
and does not attempt to move toward a possible
third category to which some but not all of the
international rules might apply.

Macak argues that there are several mecha-
nisms through which internationalization may
occur. The first is where a noninternational con-
flict becomes an international one by the military
intervention of an outside state on the side of a
rebel movement. He takes the view that a situa-
tion of outside intervention without the consent
of the territorial state may be more ambiguous if
the intervening state does not engage its armed
forces directly, but supports a rebel group in var-
ious other ways. He argues that the provision of
material or logistical support to a rebel faction is
not sufficient to internationalize the conflict, but
that such internationalization would occur if the
outside state exercises overall control of the rebel
movement, in particular by organizing and
coordinating its actions against the government
in power.

On the other hand, he argues that if foreign
intervention occurs with the consent of the
territorial state, the situation remains a noninter-
national conflict. This in effect rejects the propo-
sition that such an intervention might transform
the conflict into one governed by the rules of
international conflict if the conflict is on such a
scale as to justify the application of those rules.
Macak’s position on this point seems to reflect
the current understanding of states, as reflected
in modern conventions on armed conflict.

5 World Economic Forum, The Global Gender Gap
Report (2018), available at http://www3.weforum.org/
docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf.

RECENT BOOKS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW2020 331

http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf