On June 2, 2025, the lecture “From Peace to Humanitarianism: How the Law of War Justifies ‘Less Atrocity’” was successfully held at Jingyuan No. 2 Building, Peking University. The event was jointly organized by the Institute of International Law and the Institute for Advanced Study in Humanities and Social Sciences at Peking University. Samuel Moyn, Professor of Law and History at Yale University and Dean of the Grace Hopper School at Yale, was invited as the keynote speaker.

The lecture was chaired by Duan Demin, Tenured Associate Professor at Peking University’s School of Government and Vice Dean of the Peking University Institute for Advanced Study in Humanities and Social Sciences. Panelists included Zhu Lijiang, Professor and Vice Dean of the School of International Law at China University of Political Science and Law; Chen Xiaohang, Assistant Professor at Peking University Law School; Liu Yang, Assistant Professor at Renmin University of China Law School; Sun Yuchen, Lecturer at Tsinghua University’s Department of Political Science; Cao Wenjiao, Lecturer at the School of International Law at the China Foreign Affairs University; and Wang Jiayu, PhD candidate at Peking University Law School. Numerous faculty and students from both within and outside the university attended the lecture on-site, generating enthusiastic responses.

Lecture

Professor Moyn further elaborated on his analysis and critique of the concept of “humanitarian war.” He employed the term “humanized war” to emphasize that this shift manifests primarily in a reduction in the intensity of violence rather than a fundamental alteration in the nature of warfare. Professor Moyn particularly stressed that the influence of international humanitarian law extends beyond shaping the discourse on the legitimacy of war; it also molds the manner in which war is conducted. Historically, systematic norms aimed at “alleviating suffering in war” first emerged in the mid-19th century, exemplified by the 1864 Geneva Convention. However, some argue this stance may have desensitized the public to violence; in the context of war, the belief that warfare had become “more humane” paradoxically diminished critical scrutiny of war itself.

Professor Moyn then examines why the concept of “humane warfare” only truly took shape in international law during the late 20th century. Finally, she connects the “humane warfare” ideology to the current reality of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, analyzing how its logic persists. Professor Moyn further noted that while mainstream critiques of international humanitarian law often focus on its “poor enforcement” or “inadequate provisions,” we must also reflect on deeper questions: Does the concept of “humane war” instead obscure asymmetries in power structures? Does it morally legitimize control relationships that should not persist long-term?

Discussion

During the discussion session, Professor Zhu Lijiang commented on whether international humanitarian law legitimizes state warfare in practice. Assistant Professor Chen Xiaohang explored, from the perspective of international legal history, why the pacifist movement gradually faded after the early 20th century and how this decline contributed to the entrenchment of the “humane war” paradigm. Assistant Professor Liu Yang conducted an in-depth analysis of differing relational models between peacekeeping and violence restriction, drawing on the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Lecturer Cao Wenjiao examined whether a comprehensive shift “from peace to humanitarianism” exists from an evolutionary perspective of international law. Dr. Wang Jiayu offered commentary from the perspectives of communication studies and international legal practice. Finally, moderator Duan Demin, Tenured Associate Professor, concluded that in today's unprecedentedly complex international landscape, the insights presented in Professor Moyn's work are particularly enlightening.

Translated by: Hao Wanqing

Edited by: Shi Xiaoyu