The UN has been traditionally a prime component of small states’ foreign policy, but also a conspicuous space where norms are interpreted, bargained, and contested. Gauging the dynamics of remembrance and norms at international organizations, this article explores the purchase of norm legitimization through memory discourses. We argue that the transposition of memory at international level claims a new subjective order of legitimization, which actors then use to interpret or contest international legal norms in response to contemporary challenges. Linking our analysis to work on the centrality of interpretation for meaning-making in international law and the political processes that underpin these processes, we conceptualize the nexus between memory and international law. We articulate three mechanisms that link mnemonic invocations and norm legitimation: mnemonic co-presencing, mnemonic accountability claims, and countermemory and mnemonic critique. We also emphasize the entanglements between them on the one side, and between national and international memory discourses, on the other side. Empirically, this article examines discourses in the UN Security Council and the General Assembly in the context of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. We conclude that by epitomizing both normative and memory spaces, international organizations reveal how mnemonic practices constitute the meaning and legitimacy of international law.
Baciu et al. (Sat,) studied this question.