Using Military Force and Engaging in Collective Security

2019 ◽  
pp. 809-827
Author(s):  
Mathias Forteau
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Legal Position

This chapter addresses France’s foreign relations law in relation to the use of force. It presents both domestic rules (in particular constitutional rules) that are applicable in France to the use of force abroad and France’s legal position as regards the permissible use of force under international law. As a permanent member of the United Nations (UN) Security Council, as a nuclear-weapon state, as a military power involved in many UN or other collective peacekeeping or antiterrorism operations, and as a state specially affected by international terrorism, France is particularly interested in the identification and development of international rules related to the use of force and collective security and has developed over time domestic rules governing activities of its military forces abroad as well as some doctrine on the use of force in the international sphere. As the chapter shows in particular, the decision to use force or to participate in collective security is, as a matter of principle, a decision that has to be taken in France by the executive branch. This being said, the Parliament has recently been granted some powers on the use of force, which vary depending on the nature of the operations concerned. On the other hand, there is no judicial control of the decision to use force. Besides, there is still no clear doctrine as regards the circumstances in which French authorities consider that the use of force can be resorted to under international law.

Self-Defence and Collective Security

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sir Michael Wood
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence ◽  
Academic Debate

This chapter examines the distinction between self-defence and collective security, the two principal exceptions to the prohibition of the use of force in international law. The exercise of the right of self-defence, which includes collective self-defence, is recognized by Article 51 of the UN Charter, while collective security measures are authorized by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter. Drawing on an article by Derek Bowett published in 1994, the chapter considers the academic debate and confusion in 1990–1 concerning the distinction between self-defence and collective security. In particular, it looks at the controversy regarding the legal basis of the use of force over Korea in 1950. It also outlines six differences identified by Bowett with regard to collective self-defence and collective measures under Chapter VII.

Part II Predominant Security Challenges and International Law, International Security, Ch.13 Aggression

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kreß Claus
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Security System ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter discusses the concept of aggression. Article 39, the opening clause of the United Nations Charter’s collective security system, contains the term ‘act of aggression’, the existence of which in a given case falls to be determined by the United Nations (UN) Security Council. Recalling Article 39, the UN General Assembly, in 1974, adopted a resolution on the Definition of Aggression (Resolution 3314 (XXIX)). As the term ‘act of aggression’ is used alongside the terms ‘threat to peace’ and ‘breach of the peace’ in Article 39, the UN Security Council is not bound to determine the existence of an act of aggression to activate the Charter's collective security system and authorize the use of force by one or more States in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. In the view of the International Court of Justice and the International Law Commission, the prohibition of aggression forms part of customary international law. Here again, however, the distinct legal significance of the concept compared to ‘use of force’ and ‘armed attack’ is of quite limited reach. Contrariwise, the concept of aggression has been of considerable importance in the realm of international criminal law since the latter’s inception.

Common Interests of Humankind and the International Regulation of the Use of Force

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enzo Cannizzaro
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
International Regulation ◽  
Philosophical Foundations ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
The Law ◽  
Mere Existence ◽  
Further Development

The chapter discusses the philosophical foundations of the current regulation of the use of force. The chapter argues that, in correspondence with the emergence of a sphere of substantive rules protecting common interests of humankind, international law is also gradually developing a system of protection against egregious breaches of these interests. This conclusion is reached through an analysis of the law and practice governing the action of the UN Security Council as well as the law of state responsibility concerning individual and collective reactions to serious breaches of common interests. This system is based on positive obligations imposed upon individual states as well as UN organs, and it appears to be still rudimentary and inefficient. However, the chapter suggests that the mere existence of this system, these shortcomings notwithstanding, has the effect of promoting the further development of the law in search for more appropriate mechanisms of protection.

scholarly journals THE PERPETUAL PEACE PROJECTS AS A TREND IN THE SCHOLARLY THOUGHT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

2019 ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
V. S. Rzhevska
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Valuable Component ◽  
Human Thought ◽  
Perpetual Peace ◽  
Peaceful Settlement

The article investigates how the so-called perpetual peace projects contributed to the scholarly thought of international law. Such projects have been proposed for centuries and came to constitute a rather remarkable trend in human thought, many of them being created by people, prominent of history and representing various fields of activity. Although such projects may be considered an interdisciplinary invention, their contribution to the development of the concepts and ideas of international law can be esteemed as especially significant. The meaning of some famous examples of such projects is summarized. The conclusion is made that among the traces of the influence that the perpetual peace projects had upon the scholarly thought of international law are the preservation and propaganda of the idea of peace, the acknowledgment of law and its means as a valuable component of peace achievement, the investigation of the causes of peace-breaking and combating them, the formation of the principles of peaceful settlement of international disputes and of non-use of force or threat of force, the establishing of theoretical grounds for creating international organizations and elaborating the concept of collective security.

15. The Use of Force, Collective Security and Peacekeeping

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
International Community ◽  
Collective Security

International law aims to regulate the use of force in two ways. First, it stipulates that there is a paramount obligation not to use force to settle disputes, with only limited exceptions; and second, it has at its disposal a procedure whereby the international community itself may use force against those using violence. These are known respectively as the rules on the ‘unilateral use of force’ and the rules of ‘collective security’, both of which are discussed in this chapter.

11. Use of force

2019 ◽  
pp. 144-159
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Significant Achievement ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines under what circumstances States may use armed force under customary international law and Arts 2(4) and 51 UN Charter. After noting that the use of armed force is generally prohibited and only limited to self-defence, and then only if the target State is under an armed attack, we show that several States have expanded the notion of armed attack. Besides self-defence, the Security Council may authorize the use of armed force through a process of collective security. Several examples of collective security are offered, as well as the ICJ’s position on what constitutes an armed attack. In recent years, the range of actors capable of undertaking an armed attack has included terrorists. Moreover, the development of the doctrine of the responsibility to protect is a significant achievement.

Peace Settlements and the Prohibition of the Use of Force

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Wählisch
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Peace Agreements ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace Enforcement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Peace Treaties ◽  
Peace Settlements

This chapter explores the relationship between peace settlements (which encompass truces, armistices, ceasefires, and peace agreements) and the prohibition of the use of force. It begins by discussing the role of peace treaties in prohibiting the use of force, the consequences of non-compliance with peace settlements, and previous experiences in enforcing ceasefires and peace agreements. It then considers the elements of the applicable normative framework in international law, including the legal basis of peace treaties and the legal consequences of their breach. The chapter concludes by analysing the implementation mechanisms for peace settlements, with particular reference to the practice of monitoring and peace enforcement missions authorized by the UN Security Council.

Mandated to Protect

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haidi Willmot ◽  
Ralph Mamiya
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Republic Of The Congo ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions

This chapter focuses on the conception and evolution of the UN Security Council mandate to protect civilians during peacekeeping operations from 1960 to the present. The chapter examines the normative and legal framework of the use of force to protect civilians in UN peacekeeping operations, with reference to Security Council resolutions and other bodies of international law such as humanitarian and human rights law. It considers Security Council practice between 1960 and 1999 and its emphasis on the concept of self-defence; Security Council practice from 1999 to 2007 regarding the inception and development of the explicit ‘protection of civilians’ mandate by the Council; Security Council practice from 2007 to 2011; and prioritization of the mandate in certain peacekeeping missions, specifically UNAMID (Sudan (Darfur)), MONUC (Democratic Republic of the Congo), UNOCI (Côte d’Ivoire), and UNMISS (South Sudan). Finally, the chapter describes Security Council practice from 2011 onwards and draws conclusions on impact that the protection of civilians mandate in peacekeeping operations has had on the evolution of the legitimate use of force under the UN Charter.

Terrorism

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Saul
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The Law

International law has struggled to regulate terrorism for over a century, beginning with efforts to cooperate in the extradition and prosecution of suspects, including through unsuccessful League of Nations efforts to define and criminalize terrorism as such. Until 2001 most international attention focused on transnational criminal cooperation against terrorism, through the development of method-specific “prosecute or extradite” treaties (concerning, for instance, violence against aircraft or ships, hostage taking, or attacks on diplomats) but without defining terrorism as a general concept or crime. It may, however, be possible to qualify some terrorist acts as war crimes or crimes against humanity. Since the 1970s, there were ambivalent efforts through the UN General Assembly to develop normative frameworks to confront terrorism per se, which often came unstuck on the controversial issues of “state terrorism” and liberation movement violence. Greater consensus was achieved by 1994 with the General Assembly’s adoption of a declaration against terrorism. There appears to exist an international consensus that terrorism per se is wrongful, even if disagreement remains about identifying precisely what constitutes terrorism. The effort to deal with terrorism as such suggests that the international community views terrorism as more than its underlying physical parts, which are already crimes in most national legal systems and under certain transnational treaties. The special wrongfulness of terrorism is perhaps signified by its intimidation of civilian populations, its coercion of governments or international organizations, and its political, religious, or ideological aspect. Terrorist violence has also sometimes raised certain problems under the law of armed conflict and the law on the use of force, as well as occasionally attracted sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council. Terrorism was generally dealt with, however, through the application of general legal norms rather than through the emergence of terrorism-specific rules. After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, sharper international focus was brought to bear on the legal challenges presented by terrorism and counter-terrorism in numerous specialized branches of international law (particularly in the law of state responsibility, the law on the use of force, and international humanitarian law), as well as in the institutional practices of the UN Security Council and the impacts of counter-terrorism measures on international human rights law. By 2011 the UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon even declared the existence of an international customary law crime of transnational terrorism, although that decision has proven highly controversial as not supported by state practice. Efforts to negotiate a comprehensive international convention against terrorism have continued since 2000, with disagreement remaining over the scope of exceptions. There is also now increasing debate about whether a field of international anti-terrorism law is emerging.

scholarly journals Developing International Law in Challenging Times

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Thomas Prehi Botchway ◽  
Abdul Hamid Kwarteng
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Veto Power ◽  
Economic Diplomacy ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
International Laws ◽  
Massive Outflow ◽  
Corporate Social

The challenges confronted by the world in the 21st century are enormous; from the massive outflow of refugees, the threat of terrorism, the need for a general consensus to protect the environment, etc. There is thus the need for scholars, practitioners, and stakeholders of international law to think of effective and efficient ways of developing robust and strong international laws to deal effectively with these challenges.Using the qualitative approach to research, this paper examines some of the key challenges that confronts the development of and compliance with international law. The paper offers some new insights which have the propensity to aid in the development of and compliance with international law in these challenging times.The paper concludes that though international law has over the years expedited addressing most of the world’s challenges, the recent challenges requires modifications of some aspects of existing international laws to effectively deal with such challenges. For instance, there is the need to review the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council; there must be better interpretation of the law that prohibits the use of force, as well as the need for appropriate measures to convince states that abiding by international law is a win-win game. In addition, deploying economic diplomacy and applying the Corporate Social Responsibility Approach to Building International Law (CRASBIL) are deemed meaningful for developing international law and also achieving effective compliance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document