David Bosco joined FP in 2004 as a senior editor responsible for commissioning and editing reviews, feature articles, and essays. Prior to joining FP, he was an attorney at the law firm of Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton with a focus on international arbitration, litigation, and antitrust matters. Previously, he researched judicial reform in Chile as a Fulbright Scholar.
Between 1996 and 1998, he served as a political analyst and journalist in Bosnia and Herzegovina and as deputy director of a joint United Nations-NATO project on refugee repatriation in Sarajevo. He recently reported from Afghanistan on its nation-building process, addressing the development of the Afghan national army and legal reform.
His work has appeared in a variety of publications, including the Washington Post, New York Times Book Review, Los Angeles Times, Christian Science Monitor, Wall Street Journal-Europe, American Prospect, Legal Affairs, and Washington Quarterly.
If the U.S. and other Western powers decide to bypass the United Nations Security Council on the radioactive question of Iran's nuclear program, the internationalists will accuse them of undermining international law and order. Policymakers should tune them out. The world remains chaotic enough that the substance of international security must still trump procedure.
In considering whether and where to intervene, one question has assumed talismanic significance: Is it genocide? But as the case of Darfur shows, genocide is an unreliable trigger. Realities, not labels, should define our response.