February 12, 2026
LAHORE
International law remains a vital framework for accountability, even as its standards are severely tested by ongoing crises in Gaza, Ukraine, and Kashmir, said panelists at the 6th Asma Jahangir Conference.
The discussion titled, “Breach of International Law: Ukraine, Gaza and Kashmir,” was held on the second day of the conference, on February 8, at the Faletti’s Hotel in Lahore. American attorney and former director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), Ken Roth, addressed questions posed at the session, which was moderated by Saroop Ijaz, Senior Counsel at HRW, Pakistan.
Roth challenged the idea that the repeated violations of international law have signalled its collapse, urging that while enforcement is uneven, legal mechanisms continue to operate and matter.
However, he pointed to institutional responses, public scrutiny, and accountability efforts as evidence that international law had not yet been rendered completely irrelevant.
At the beginning of the session, Saroop Ijaz said that the world is living in a time when the “obituary of international law” is being written on a daily basis, especially as widespread violence in Gaza has been broadcast live across social media.
He noted that these highly visible incidents had amplified the perception of legal erosion and had fuelled skepticism about the efficacy of international norms.
Roth responded by arguing that the existence of atrocities, even genocidal ones, did not mean that international law was dead.
“Genocides happened even before international law existed,” said Roth. “The fact that violations occur despite laws does not mean that the laws themselves have died,” he said, emphasizing that continued institutional engagement showed that the system still functions.
On Gaza, he criticized the United States government for what he described as “enabling actions widely condemned”, as violations of international law, through arms transfers and billions in aid to Israel.
He said that while the UN Security Council had been largely ineffective due to the US veto, other bodies such as the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) have repeatedly condemned the violence and described it as a ‘genocide’. The UNHRC has also established monitoring mechanisms that have reported on arms transfers and criticized these practices.
Roth noted that the International Criminal Court (ICC) had charged Israeli leaders with war crimes and crimes against humanity, and this reflected active enforcement of legal norms – even if they were imperfect.
Discussing global trends, Roth highlighted a worrying rise in the pattern of populist politics in democratic countries, where anti-immigrant agendas blamed migrants for economic hardship and cultural anxieties. Yet he cautioned that such approaches could backfire, explaining that ‘immigration raids’ that are indiscriminate and end up harming regular people often lack public support.
Comparing the widespread condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, with a muted reaction to the US aggression against Venezuela, Roth addressed the double standards in the global responses when it came to serious breaches of international law.
He argued that Europe’s initial reluctance to challenge the US over Venezuela has weakened the credibility of the rules-based order, only prompting firmer pushback when strategic interests such as sovereignty and Arctic security came into play.
Throughout the session, Roth underscored the central role of public conscience in defending human rights.
“The strength and foundation of the international human rights system lies in the public’s sense of right and wrong,” he said, adding that public outrage and scrutiny can compel governments to change practices when abuses are spotlighted.
Roth paid tribute to Asma Jahangir, recalling his long association with her and calling it an honour to participate in a conference held in her memory.
The session closed with a clear message: while international law faces profound challenges in conflict zones like Ukraine, Gaza, and Kashmir, as well as other places, it continues to be asserted, defended, and enforced through institutions and global civic pressure.