Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors: PS to Hague Academy Lectures

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Apparent Contradiction ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The Hague ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Self Defence

In July 2021, the author presented a Special Course for the Hague Academy of International Law Summer Courses on the Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors. The course focused on two bases for the extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors, namely self-defence and intervention by invitation. The lectures came to a conclusion that may, at first glance, appear contradictory. With respect to the use of force in self-defence, the lectures adopted a restrictive (non-permissive) approach in which the use of force is not permitted save in narrowly construed exceptions. With respect to intervention by invitation, the lectures adopted a more permissive approach in which the use of force is generally permitted and prohibited only in narrowly construed exceptions. This article serves as post-script (PS), to explain the apparent contradiction. It concludes that the main reason for this apparent contradiction is the application of the fundamental principles of international law—sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence—which are consistent with intervention by invitation but are undermined by self-defence against non-state actors.

Conference Report – “From Government to Governance? The Growing Impact of Non-State Actors on the International and European Legal System” - 6th ASIL / NVIR / T.M.C. Asser Institute Joint Conference in The Hague, 3 -5 July 2003

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 827-850 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kirchner
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Conference Report ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Joint Conference ◽  
The Hague ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The U.S

This year's 6th Joint Conference held by the American and Dutch Societies of International Law and organised by the T.M.C. Asser Institute in The Hague focused on the increasing importance of the role of non-state actors in international law and at the same time provided an opportunity for American and European lawyers to address recent differences between the U.S. and Europe, e.g. on the use of force in Iraq. Consequently one of the three major issues of the conference was the response to international terrorism, while other issues included the role of international organizations as well as transnational corporations in international law.

10. International law and the use of force

2021 ◽  
pp. 219-246
Author(s):  
Nicole Scicluna
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Turning Point ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter explores the justness, legitimacy, and legality of war. While 1945 was a key turning point in the codification of jus ad bellum (i.e. international law on the use of force), that framework did not emerge in a vacuum. Rather, it was the product of historical political contingencies that meant that codification of the laws of war was contemporaneous, both geographically and temporally, with the solidification of the norms of sovereign nation-statehood and territorial integrity. The chapter focuses on the UN Charter regime and how it has shaped the politics of war since 1945. Importantly, the Charter establishes a general prohibition on the use of force in international relations. It also grants two exceptions to the prohibition: actions undertaken with Security Council authorization and actions taken in self-defence. Today, many of the most serious challenges to the Charter regime concern the definition and outer limits of the concept of self-defence. Another set of challenges to the Charter regime concerns the contested concept of ‘humanitarian intervention’. The chapter then looks at the development of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ doctrine.

Territorial Integrity Narrowly Interpreted: Reasserting the Classical Inter-State Paradigm of International Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
OLIVIER CORTEN
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Traditional Conception ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Special Case ◽  
Inter State

AbstractParagraph 80 of the Kosovo AO reflects a very traditional conception of international law. By insisting on the inter-state character of the principle of territorial integrity, the Court refused to challenge the classical argument of the ‘neutrality’ of international law in regard to secession. The Court also refused any reinterpretation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. As already stated in the Wall Advisory Opinion, the prohibition of the use of force is only applicable between states. It does not apply between states and non-state actors, whether secessionist or not. Similarly, the Court refused the argument of ‘remedial secession’, at least as far as it would imply a right to violate the principle of territorial integrity of a state by a secessionist group. Indeed, if the latter principle is not applicable in such situations, it logically cannot be violated and there is therefore no right to infringe it. Finally, the Court refused to consider Kosovo as a ‘special case’ or a sui generis situation. According to the Court, this situation must be governed by the traditional rules of general international law. This implies that Kosovo did not violate international law by proclaiming independence. But this also implies that a declaration of independence by a secessionist group inside Kosovo would not be contrary to international law. Moreover, it can be pointed out that if Kosovo is not a state (a hypothesis perfectly compatible with the advisory opinion), then general international law would not preclude Serbia from invoking the argument of ‘legal neutrality’ to support such a secessionist group.

The Implications of the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction for the Prohibition of the Use of Force

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Joyner
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Mass Destruction ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Regional Conflicts ◽  
The Us ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) between states and non-state actors and its implications for international law governing the use of force. It considers whether WMD proliferation and changes in security realities have brought a crisis in international law on the use of force and discusses the use of pre-emptive force for preventing states and non-state actors ‘of concern’ from developing and using WMD. It analyses the shift in the policy positions of the US and other relatively powerful states, from more multilateral and diplomacy-based ‘non-proliferation’ to increased emphasis on proactive and often unilateral or small-coalition-based ‘counterproliferation’. It looks at concerns that several states will be emboldened to apply the doctrine of counterproliferation-oriented pre-emption to their regional conflicts. Finally, it evaluates proposals to reform the provisions and procedures of the UN Charter system for regulating the use of force, including the law on self-defence.

scholarly journals O Terrorismo e o Uso da Força no Direito Internacional

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiara Antonia Sofia Mafrica Biazi ◽  
David Fernando Santiago Villena Del Carpio
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Santa Catarina ◽  
De Se ◽  
Terrorist Groups ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Ius Gentium ◽  
Self Defence

O TERRORISMO E O USO DA FORÇA NO DIREITO INTERNACIONAL  TERRORISM AND USE OF FORCE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW   Chiara Antonia Sofia Mafrica Biazi*David Fernando Santiago Villena del Carpio**  RESUMO: O presente artigo aborda a questão do terrorismo sob a perspectiva do direito internacional. Traça um histórico do fenômeno do terrorismo, apontando suas raízes bastante antigas, e se debruça sobre as políticas dos Estados voltadas à segurança após 11/9. Considerado um marco tanto na política quanto no direito internacional, o fenômeno do terrorismo traz à tona diversas discussões, como as que dizem respeito à legalidade do uso da força para combatê-lo. Após analisar as exceções previstas no direito internacional à proibição do uso da força, o artigo aborda a possibilidade de se usar a força em legítima defesa contra entidades não estatais, nomeadamente grupos terroristas, trazendo os debates pertinentes da doutrina. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Terrorismo. Direito Internacional. 11/9. Uso da Força. ABSTRACT: This article tackles the issue of terrorism from the perspective of International law. It sets forth a brief history of the phenomenon of terrorism, by pointing out its ancient roots, and dwells on the security-oriented States´ policies after 9/11. Regarded as a milestone both in politics and International law, the phenomenon of terrorism brings up various debates, such as those relating to the legality of the use of force in order to fight against it. After assessing the exceptions to the prohibition of the use of force which international law foresees, the article tackles the possibility of using force in self-defence against non-state actors, namely terrorist groups, putting forward the relevant theoretical discussions on the subject. KEYWORDS: Terrorism. International Law. 9/11. Use of Force.  SUMÁRIO: Introdução. 1 O Terrorismo na História. 2 A Era do Terror: Novas Políticas a Partir do 11/9. 3 Uso da Força no Direito Internacional e Carta da ONU. 3.1 As Exceções: Legítima Defesa Individual e Coletiva e Ações do Conselho de Segurança Conforme Capítulo VII da Carta. 3.2 Controvérsias: Legítima Defesa Preventiva, Preemptiva, Proteção de Nacionais no Exterior. 4 Uso da Força no Combate ao Terrorismo Internacional. Conclusão. Referências._________________________* Doutoranda junto ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). Mestre em Direito e Relações Internacionais pela Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). Membro do Grupo de Pesquisa CNPq Ius Gentium. ** Doutorando junto ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). Mestre em Direito e Relações Internacionais pela Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC).  

Use of Armed Force against Suspected Foreign Submarines in the Swedish Internal Waters and Territorial Sea

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 585-599
Author(s):  
Said Mahmoudi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Present Article ◽  
National Level ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
Actual Response ◽  
Self Defence

Abstract Sweden’s territorial sea and internal waters have experienced regular intrusions by submerged foreign submarines since the early 1950s. The response of the country to such intrusions is generally well-documented and mainly public. The present article offers an overview of the development of the relevant national legislation, the actual response of the naval forces, and the legal arguments invoked at national level to justify or dismiss use of force in self-defence or under another title. The article discusses the relevance of the immunity that submarines normally enjoy under international law and Sweden’s human-rights obligations, two issues that have been at the centre of the legal discourse. Particular attention is paid to developments since 2014 when a new round of “submarine hunts” started and led to the adoption of new measures both revising the existing laws and strengthening the defence forces.

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.

Part 3 The Post 9/11-Era (2001–), 53 ‘Operation Phoenix’, the Colombian Raid Against the FARC in Ecuador—2008

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinto Mónica ◽  
Kotlik Marcos
Keyword(s):  
Armed Forces ◽  
The Political ◽  
Organization Of American States ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
American States ◽  
Political Cost ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This contribution examines the 2008 operation conducted by Colombia against a camp of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) located in the territory of Ecuador. It sets out the facts, the legal positions of both countries, the reactions of other governments in the continent, and how the situation was addressed within the Organization of American States and the Rio Group. It then analyses the operation in light of discussions about the possible exercise of the right to self-defence against non-state actors. The closing section suggests that, although the political cost for Colombia was relatively low, this case contributes to a restrictive interpretation of the right, to self-defence based on the inviolability of territorial integrity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document