Diritto internazionale: la fine delle regole?

This contribution challenges the widespread perception that international law is in decline or losing its normative force in the context of contemporary armed conflicts, particularly in Ukraine and the Middle East. It argues that, despite serious and ongoing violations of fundamental rules—most notably the prohibition of the use of force and core human rights obligations—the international legal system as a whole remains largely operative, as shown by the continued functioning of treaty regimes in fields such as trade, investment, and human rights, and their regular application by domestic courts. The paper contends that the narrative of “collapse” often stems from a misreading of the evolution of the rules-based order rather than from its actual disintegration. While critiques of international law’s effectiveness are longstanding, in the post–Cold War period they have increasingly focused on its alleged “constitutionalisation”, understood as the hierarchical consolidation of Charter principles such as the prohibition of force, self-determination, and human rights protection. Recent developments, especially since 2022, have been interpreted by some as evidence of a process of “deconstitutionalisation”, marked by weakening collective enforcement and reduced state responsiveness to serious breaches. This article argues instead that the primary issue lies not in the disappearance of legal norms, but in the erosion of political commitment to their effective enforcement, resulting in a functional regression of the system without its legal collapse. Focusing on recent state practice, including responses—or lack thereof—to grave violations of fundamental norms, the analysis highlights how current dynamics are reshaping the understanding of countermeasures and collective reaction. The article concludes by identifying three illustrative case studies that exemplify this regressive tendency in contemporary international practice.