Kyle Reed (ne Rapp)
Ph.D. Political Science & International Relations

Commentary and Public Scholarship

​

"Measuring Behavior, Not Compliance," The Loop - ECPR's Political Science Blog. 3 October 2022

​

What do human rights measurements tell us about compliance with international law? Drawing on my dissertation research, I argue that human rights measurements - while important - are poor proxies for legal compliance. Focusing on behavior minimizes the role of justification and interpretation in compliance and risks misrepresenting the effects of international law on human rights practices. Instead, I urge scholars to consider how measurements might be combined with textual data to develop deeper and more accurate understandings of legal compliance.

​

"Universal Jurisdiction is Making a Comeback," World Politics Review. 27 July 2021

​

What is the place of universal jurisdiction in international justice? While often criticized as idealistic or politically infeasible, universal jurisdiction offers an important tool for justice - if its flaws can be addressed. In this piece, I discuss the history of universal jurisdiction and its current place in international justice. I also discuss some of the challenges facing universal jurisdiction and how its supporters may strengthen it into an effective and important tool for international justice.

​

"Biden reversed Trump's sanctions on International Criminal Court officials. What happens now?," The Washington Post [Monkey Cage]. 5 April 2021 (with Kelebogile Zvobgo)

 

On April 2nd, the Biden administration lifted Trump-era sanctions on key ICC officials while still voicing concerns over the investigations that triggered sanctions in the first place. We discuss what led to the sanctions as well as what might happen next - in particular, the opportunities for selective engagement between the US and the ICC.

 

"Justifying Force: The Use of International Law in Foreign Policy Justifications," Public Diplomacy Magazine. 1 Jul 2020

 

Why do leaders invoke international law when justifying foreign policy decisions, and what does this mean for broader questions of ethics in international relations? Drawing on archival research, I highlight the motives behind international law justifications in two cases, showing that these statements are primarily intended to win foreign support for the policy choice. Importantly, these justifications are motivated by political - not ethical - concerns. Law is employed as a tool and, while it may reflect an ethical commitment by actors it can just as easily be used disingenuously for political gain. At the same time, the fact that decision-makers feel constrained by law - compelled to justify their decisions in light of it - reminds us that international law can have a constraining effect on policymakers. 

​

"Uruguay and the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance" (3 October 2019) AND "Uruguay Returns to the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance." (19 March 2020) with Nicolas Albertoni, in The Global Americans

​

Why did Uruguay choose to leave - and then return to - the Rio Pact? We discuss these questions, highlighting Uruguay's concerns that the pact would be exploited to justify military intervention against Venezuela. While this is possible, we argue that such concerns are unlikely and we hail Uruguay's decision to return to the pact as the right choice. Ultimately, Uruguay is able to exercise more influence from inside the pact that outside.