We introduce a dynamic game of outbidding where two groups use violence to compete in a tug-of-war fashion for evolving public support. We fit the model to the canonical outbidding rivalry between Hamas and Fatah using newly collected data on Palestinian public support for these groups. Competition has heterogeneous effects, and we demonstrate that intergroup competition can discourage violence. Competition from Hamas leads Fatah to use more terrorism than it would in a world where Hamas abstains from terrorism, but competition from Fatah can lead Hamas to attack less than it otherwise would. Likewise, making Hamas more capable or interested in competing increases overall violence, but making Fatah more capable or interested discourages violence on both sides. These discouragement effects of competition on violence emerge through an asymmetric contest, in which we find that Fatah uses terrorism more effectively to boost its support, although Hamas has lower attack costs. Expanding on these results, we demonstrate that outbidding theory is consistent with a positive, negative, or null relationship between measures of violence and incentives to compete.

Whereas significant attention has been devoted to online/blended teaching and related tools, open GenAI chatbots and large language models and writing programs have received comparatively less attention as instruments that impact our teaching and assessment methods. The pedagogies of political science and international relations somehow trail behind in understanding and addressing them. For those who are teaching these subjects, it is of great importance to come to terms with AI and its impact on how we should assess students. This article describes an eight-week laboratory during which we experimented with and discussed ChatGPT’s utilizations with our students. The goal of the laboratory was to revise which type of learning objectives our teaching should have and which type of assessment methods are best suited for an environment in which GenAI is present and used regularly. Should we ban it or should we instead focus on teaching students how to use it responsibly and ethically, as well as developing a shared understanding of what GenAI is good for (if anything at all)? Consequently, which learning objectives and assessment methods should we adopt?

Can treaty terms be implied? And, if so, what does that mean? This Article draws on concepts from the branch of linguistics known as pragmatics to analyze how the rules on treaty interpretation allow, in exceptional cases, for the identification of implied terms in otherwise express treaty texts. Its key insight is that implied terms fit within the framework of Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and are derived from the associated interpretation of express terms. They cannot be derived from a separate process—and indeed such a separate process is not possible under the positive law.

This Article examines how World Athletics, a private regulatory body, has shaped the legal norm of gender equality. Focusing on three landmark legal challenges to World Athletics’ regulation of gender, this Article shows how the organization has constructed the meaning of gender equality as it has pursued global, monopolistic, and autonomous authority. World Athletics has retrofitted this norm to align with its longstanding regulatory practices by essentializing women, coopting rivalrous actors, and depoliticizing sex. In doing so, the organization has repeatedly construed and constrained the meaning of gender equality to bolster its private regulatory authority.

This essay is the winning entry of the 2023–4 Royal Institute of Philosophy THINK Essay Prize Competition, for which there were 330 entries. Claudia Wong is 16-year-old student at Cheltenham Ladies’ College.

This article examines how Imperial Japanese military doctors—both Army and Navy medical specialists—employed blood-type analysis in military medicine, from the first military medical publication of blood-type research in 1926 to the end of the Asia-Pacific War in 1945. It explores the military physicians’ quest to investigate the relevance of blood-group knowledge and their attempt to integrate ideas derived from Furukawa Takeji’s Blood Type–Temperament Correlation Theory—the idea that blood type is linked to personality traits—into the operations of the armed forces, a process I term ‘sero-rationalization’. By the mid-1930s, however, escalating conflicts prompted a shift in research priorities. Military physicians increasingly focused on serology and the technological advancements required for blood transfusions, moving away from earlier biopsychological discussions of blood types. This shift reflected an urgent need to address wartime medical challenges, including treating injuries and developing reliable transfusion methods. With the intensification of war by the 1940s, frontline physicians began exploring alternatives to traditional blood typing, such as cross-type transfusions and even animal-to-human transfusions. In their attempts to circumvent the ABO blood-group system in dealing with wartime medical emergencies, military physicians departed significantly from their initial emphasis on serological differentiation. Ironically, the pursuit of sero-rationalization—intended to optimize military efficiency—ultimately proved counterproductive.