You received a Master in International Law from the Institute, another one from Harvard, and you are now a PhD candidate and Teaching Assistant at the Geneva Academy. What is the topic of your thesis and what subjects are you teaching?

My thesis focuses on the legal issues that arise when foreign nationals participate in armed conflicts (the so-called "foreign fighters" or "international volunteers"), a topic I worked on while at the International Committee of the Red Cross and started investigating further at Harvard.

At the Geneva Academy, I assist courses and teach primarily on refugee law. I also organise “Military Briefings”, which are conferences that allow our students to interact with members of the armed forces.

What do you enjoy the most in the variety of activities you are conducting and why?

First, I enjoy the substance of the issues I work on: it gives me the impression of doing something meaningful, although they are difficult topics that often involve human tragedies, and my impact is obviously limited.

On a day-to-day basis, what I enjoy the most is the collective dimension of some of the activities in which I am involved. The PhD is a highly individual, demanding and difficult enterprise. Academic careers are also often described as rather solitary. In my experience, it is true in a number of ways, but, fortunately, there are many opportunities to take part in collective endeavours, to create connections and synergies; this is the most stimulating part of academia and research.

Finally, I also really enjoy teaching: every year I learn a lot from the students. Their projects and enthusiasm are a great source of stimulation. As for their concerns and criticisms, they are a healthy challenge and source of introspection.

What evolutions do you see among our students?

Since I first came to the Institute in 2016, I would say that I have seen some changes but also continuity. Starting with the changes, the student body has become more diverse in terms of backgrounds, interests, ambitions, as well as geographical, cultural and socio-economic origins.

This is good: this diversity better reflects the world we live in. We are also feeling the effects of broader social issues and conversations: many of our students pay close attention and do not shy away from engaging with issues such as racial, gender, and social discrimination, and their systemic nature and manifestations. Many are also more critical and vocal than I remember us being. This sometimes creates tensions. However, this is where I see continuity.

Since its inception, the Institute has stood for humanistic values, and the research and teaching conducted here have embodied a form of idealism; a general belief that we can and should make the world better. The demands of new generations of students are therefore a testament to both what has been achieved and what remains to be done. It is also a good warning against the risk of complacency. Overall it creates a stimulating dynamic, one that gives hope even in these uncertain times.

This article was published in Globe #31.