The Lawfulness of Military Assistance to the Republic of Viet-Nam

1967 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Norton Moore
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Major Change ◽  
Viet Nam ◽  
Military Assistance ◽  
Collective Defense ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The major thrust of contemporary international law is to restrict coercion in international relations as a modality of major change. The use of force as an instrument of change has always been wasteful, disruptive, and tragic. In the nuclear era the renunciation of force as a method of settlement of disputes has become an imperative. These necessities have resulted in a widely accepted distinction between lawful and unlawful uses of force in international relations which is embodied in the United Nations Charter. Force pursuant to the right of individual or collective defense or expressly authorized by the centralized peacekeeping machinery of the United Nations is lawful. Essentially all other major uses of force in international relations are unlawful. These fundamental proscriptions are designed to protect self-determination of the peoples of the world and to achieve at least minimum world public order. As such, they reflect the basic expectations of the international community. Since they are aimed at prohibiting the unilateral use of force as a modality of major change, they have consistently authorized the use of force in individual or collective defense at least “until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” This defensive right is, at least at the present level of effectiveness of international peacekeeping machinery, necessary to the prevention of unilateral use of force as an instrument of change. The fundamental distinction between unlawful unilateral force to achieve major change and lawful force in individual or collective defense against such coercion is the structural steel for assessment of the lawfulness of the present military assistance to the Republic of Viet-Nam.

scholarly journals Implementation in practice: The use of force to protect civilians in United Nations peacekeeping

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 458-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingvild Bode ◽  
John Karlsrud
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Member States ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Peacekeeping ◽  
Normative Foundations

Since the failures of the United Nations of the early 1990s, the protection of civilians has evolved as a new norm for United Nations peacekeeping operations. However, a 2014 United Nations report found that while peacekeeping mandates often include the use of force to protect civilians, this has routinely been avoided by member states. What can account for this gap between the apparently solid normative foundations of the protection of civilians and the wide variation in implementation? This article approaches the question by highlighting normative ambiguity as a fundamental feature of international norms. Thereby, we consider implementation as a political, dynamic process where the diverging understandings that member states hold with regard to the protection of civilians norm manifest and emerge. We visualize this process in combining a critical-constructivist approach to norms with practice theories. Focusing on the practices of member states’ military advisers at the United Nations headquarters in New York, and their positions on how the protection of civilians should be implemented on the ground, we draw attention to their agency in norm implementation at an international site. Military advisers provide links between national ministries and contingents in the field, while also competing for being recognized as competent performers of appropriate implementation practices. Drawing on an interpretivist analysis of data generated through an online survey, a half-day workshop and interviews with selected delegations, the article adds to the understanding of norms in international relations while also providing empirical insights into peacekeeping effectiveness.

Resolution 530 (1983

1984 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 838-840
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Central America ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Northern Border ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The One

The Security Council,Having heard the statement of the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Nicaragua,Having also heard the statements of various States Members of the United Nations in the course of the debate,Deeply concerned, on the one hand, at the situation prevailing on and insid the northern border of Nicaragua and, on the other hand, at the consequent dange of a military confrontation between Honduras and Nicaragua, which could further aggravate the existing crisis.situation in Central America,Recalling all the relevant principles of the Charter of the United Nations,, particularly the obligation of States to settle their disputes exclusively by peaceful means, not to resort to the threat or use of force and to respect the self-determination of peoples and the sovereign independence of all States,Noting the widespread desire expressed by the States concerned to achieve solutions to the differences between them,

scholarly journals The Legality Of Nato'S Action In The Former Republic Of Yugoslavia (Fry) Under International Law

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 910-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

The use of force has been prohibited in international relations since at least the United Nations Charter, 1945. Article 2 (4) of the Charter states:All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the United Nations.

scholarly journals SENGKETA INDONESIA DAN TIMOR LESTE TERKAIT PERJANJIAN PERBATASAN MARITIM

2021 ◽  
pp. 1127
Author(s):  
Ida Kurnia ◽  
Alexander Sutomo ◽  
Cliff Geraldio
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
The State ◽  
East Timor ◽  
First Century ◽  
Timor Leste ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Independent Country

The State of Timor Leste is an independent and sovereign country in the 21st (twenty-first) century with its official name Democratica de Timor-Leste (RTL). Timor-Leste went through a long history to be able to stand alone as an independent country. Prior to the independence of Timor-Leste, it was called East Timor, which was a former colony of the Portuguese which later merged into the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. It is recorded in history that integration was formalized on July 17, 1976. Then East Timor officially became the 27th province of the Republic of Indonesia and became the youngest province at that time. In history, Timor-Leste was colonized by the Portuguese for 450 years, the Dutch for 3 years, and Indonesia for 24 years. Under the leadership of the United Nations through the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor.The establishment of Timor-Leste became a necessary new state on the border, especially with Indonesia. The issue of maritime boundaries between Indonesia and Timor-Leste has not yet been agreed. The method used is normative. Based on UNCLOS 1982, if maritime boundaries are included in the territory of state ownership, the principle used is the principle of equidistance. Second, there is no clear authority within the borders of Indonesia so that the current condition of Indonesia's borders, especially in terms of security, is not conducive. Third, based on Article 3 of UNCLOS, both countries have the right to the width of their territorial sea up to a limit of 12 miles from the baseline, if their territorial seas do not overlap. Negara Timor Leste merupakan negara yang merdeka dan berdaulat pada abad ke-21 (dua puluh satu) dengan nama resminya Democratica de Timor-Leste (RTL) merupakan suatu negara yang tidak terlalu besar yang terletak di Benua Australia dan timur Negara Indonesia. Timor-Leste melewati sejarah yang panjang hingga dapat berdiri sendiri sebagai suatu negara yang merdeka. Sebelum merdekanya Timor-Leste dahulunya disebut Timor-Timur yang merupakan wilayah bekas jajahan Bangsa Portugis yang kemudian bergabung dalam kesatuan Negara Republik Indonesia. Dalam sejarah tercatat bahwa integrasi telah diresmikan pada 17 Juli 1976. Selanjutnya, Timor-Timur resmi menjadi provinsi ke-27 Negara Republik Indonesia  dan menjadi provinsi paling muda di saat itu. Dalam sejarah Timor-Leste d jajah oleh Bangsa Portugis selama 450 tahun, Belanda 3 tahun, dan Indonesia selama 24 tahun. Dibawah pimpinan PBB melalui lembaga.United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor.Berdirinya Timor-Leste menjadi negara baru diperlukan batas wilayah khususnya dengan Indonesia. Pemasalahan batas maritim antara Indonesia dan Timor-Leste sampai saat ini belum ada kesepakatan. Adapun metode yang digunakan adalah normatif. Berdasarkan UNCLOS 1982 apabila batas maritim masuk ke dalam wilayah kedaulatan negara, maka prinsip yang dipergunakan adalah prinsip sama jarak (equidistance). Kedua, tidak adanya wewenang yang jelas dalam pengelolaan perbatasan Indonesia sehingga kondisi perbatasan Indonesia saat ini terutama dari sisi stabilitas keamanan belum kondusif. Ketiga, berdasarkan Pasal 3 UNCLOS kedua negara mempunyai hak atas lebar laut teritorialnya sampai batas 12 mil diukur dari garis pangkal, apabila tidak saling tumpang tindih wilayah laut teritorialnya.

United Nations: General Assembly Resolution Containing the Declaration on the Enhancement Of The Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations

1988 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1672-1679 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
General Assembly Resolution ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Definition Of

Over the past two decades, the United Nations General Assembly has adopted a number of principles concerning the conduct of international relations. In the preambular paragraphs of the declaration annexed to this resolution, specific principles are reaffirmed. They are: the Declaration on Principles of Interna-tional Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations [9 I.L.M. 1292 (1970)], the Definition of Aggression [13 I.L.M. 710 (1974)], and the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes [21 I.L.M. 449 (1982)]. The Declaration for 6n the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force is the culmination of 10 years of work, and represents the most recent set of guidelines.

scholarly journals International law on the principle of non-use of force or the threat of force

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 115-122
Author(s):  
Vladimir A. Jilkine
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Fundamental Factor ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations

The Article presents an analysis of the main provisions of the principle of non-use of force or the threat of force proclaimed in the UN Charter and amended by Helsinki Final Act. The UN Charter puts first the principle of non-use of force or the threat of force among the main principles of international law, which is a fundamental factor in ensuring peace and safety throughout the world. The only mechanism for making decisions on the use of military force as the final argument can only be the UN Charter. The problem of the use of force was and remains one of the most complex and debatable in international law. The article provides a comparative and legal analysis of sources of international law governing the use of force or the threat of force in international law and individual cases in the practice of international relations. Russia does everything possible to prevent the use of military force in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, destabilization of the situation in the world, and builds international relations on the principles of international law for ensuring the reliable and equal security of states.

The Concept of "Just War" in Contemporary International Law

10.12737/3468 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 117-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Кира Сазонова ◽  
Kira Sazonova
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Real Challenge

The aims and goals of war have drastically changed during the recent decades. The prohibition of the use of force fixed in the Charter of the United Nations became a real challenge to many states. Nevertheless, we observe regular use of force in international relations. Though "classic" interstate wars became rather rare, the states continue to solve their political problems by exploiting the armed forces. In these circumstances it is problematic to explain the use of force from the legal point. That is why we talk so much about "preventive self-defence", "humanitarian intervention", "the responsibility to protect" and some other controversial concepts. One of the most disputable among them is a "just war" concept, which has practically not been analyzed in our domestic doctrine. However, the western school of international law is actively implementing precisely the legal dimension of the "just war" concept. Of course, the concept itself is extremely political, but the consequences of its practical implementation may have a great impact on contemporary international law, as it tries to legitimize the use of force in circumvention of the Charter of the United Nations. Because of the huge importance of the question, the analysis of the concept seems extremely actual.

scholarly journals Conditions for the lawful exercise of the right of self-defence in international law

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 01008
Author(s):  
V. Upeniece
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Normative Order ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

The Charter of the United Nations wasthought to establish a normative order, maintain international peace and security. According to the Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs”[1]. However the Article 51 doesnot propose a legal definition of the conduct which is considered as an armed attack or the commencement of such an attack. It does not propose strict criterions for the use of force for self-defence. As a result different interpretations of this norm have been arising and continuing to change in response to new situations and threats.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Yitzhak Benbaji ◽  
Daniel Statman
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

The legal prohibition on aggression was first posited in the 1928 Kellogg-Briand pact (‘The Pact of Paris’), which outlawed ‘war as an instrument of national policy’. The parties to this pact undertook the duty not to use force to resolve ‘disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them’. Later, the United Nations Charter gave expression to the same idea: ‘All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.’...

Use of Force

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Distefano
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Security System ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Legal Definition ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations (UN Charter) concerning the comprehensive ban on the use of force in international relations between states. It provides a legal definition of aggression and self-defence and addresses some unanswered questions concerning some of the alleged exceptions to the comprehensive ban on the use of force. It shows that the obligation not to resort to threat or use of force is not subordinated to the actual functioning of the UN collective security system and highlights the UN Charter’s establishment of substantive and institutional framework for making the prohibition on the use and threat of force between states a truly attainable goal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document