2021] NATIONALITY LAWS 129 with the norm, regardless of when precisely the jus cogens norm emerged. However, this raises a challenging issue, namely, the consequences and effects that flow from the presence of conflict with jus cogens norms. The characterization of the effects of jus cogens has been described as “the greater prize than identifying the norm itself.”196 As Dire Tladi, International Law Commission (Commission) Special Rapporteur on Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens), noted in a 2017 report, invalidity of a treaty is often considered “the primary, or even sole, consequence of the jus cogens status of a norm.”197 At first glance, Articles 53 and 64 of VCLT present a problem for the validity of ICERD in light of Article 1(3) and its potential inconsistency with the jus cogens prohibition against racial discrimination.198 However, there is an alternative to invaliding a treaty that conflicts with a jus cogens norm. In the 2017 report, Special Rapporteur Tladi explains that the requirement to resort to the “draconian” outcome of treaty invalidity199 when a conflict with jus cogens norms seemingly arises should—and indeed generally can—be avoided by reading treaty provisions in light of jus cogens norms. Due to the “fundamental principle” that “treaties are binding on the parties and must be performed in good faith,”200 known as pacta sunt servanda, the validity of a treaty, and not its invalidity, should be strived for when determining if 196 DANIEL COSTELLOE, LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF PEREMPTORY NORMS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 15 (2017), quoted in Dire Tladi (Special Rapporteur), Third Report on Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens), ¶ 20, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/714 (Feb. 12, 2018) [hereinafter Special Rapporteur, Third Report on Jus Cogens]. 197 Special Rapporteur, Third Report on Jus Cogens, supra note 196, ¶ 30. See also Kyoj Kawasaki, A Brief Note on the Legal Effects of Jus Cogens in International Law, 34 HITOTSUBASHI J. L. & POL. 27 (2006); HUGH THIRLWAY, THE SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW (2014). 198 See VCLT, supra note 101, art. 44(5) (stating that one key differentiation is that severability of the relevant provision is not possible for cases falling under Article 53). See generally Special Rapporteur, Third Report on Jus Cogens, supra note 196, ¶¶ 30–54. 199 Special Rapporteur, Third Report on Jus Cogens, supra note 196, ¶¶ 55–59. 200 Documents of the Second Part of the Seventeenth Session and of the Eighteenth Session Including the Reports of the Commission to the General Assembly, [1966] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 221, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SER.A/1966/Add.1.