The books reviewed here provide a basis for evaluating international humanitarian law (IHL) and the related crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity prior to 9/11 and serve as a benchmark for assessing the value of international humanitarian law norms in an age when the Bush administration has rejected many of the most fundamental norms. However, the author argues that these works of analytic jurisprudence ought to take political factors into consideration in assessing why these norms are both under challenge and under possible revision. Furthermore, a methodology of political jurisprudence, represented by this review essay, suggests that the books’ presumption for prosecution IHL norms is impractical. Alternatives to prosecuting these norms, such as establishing truth commissions and using customary justice, are more likely to achieve some of the desired IHLgoals of ending impunity, adjusting historical memory, and providing a sense of justice to victims.