Are New Principles Really Needed? The Potential of the Established Distinction Between Responsibility for Attacks by Nonstate Actors and the Law of Self-Defense

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 576-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Hmoud
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Nonstate Actors ◽  
Legal Policy ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
State Practice

Daniel Bethlehem’s note on self-defense principles is intended to stimulate debate on one of the most contentious issues facing the international community today, namely, the legal response to imminent or actual terrorist attacks by nonstate actors. The note contains a set of principles that are sensitive to the practical realities of the circumstances that it addresses. But it is also intended to take up a legal policy matter—to create or amend principles of international law related to the use of armed force in dealing with threats from nonstate actors. To create or amend these principles, there must be clear evidence and sufficient state practice, or at least opinio juris, pointing toward the change of existing rules or the creation of new rules to “fill the gap.” The whole balance in international law among the various rights, obligations, and interests of international actors will be compromised if the notion of self-defense is to be expanded beyond its legitimate limitations. As illustrated below by some basic examples drawn from the existing law of self-defense, there is sufficient flexibility in the current legal order to allow for the lawful exercise of self-defense in response to most situations of armed terrorist attacks.

scholarly journals The Challenge of Cyber Attacks in the “Information Age” and the Jus Ad Bellum

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Pshtiwan Mohammed Qader
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Information Age ◽  
Cyber Attacks ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Critical Infrastructures ◽  
Cyber Attack ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Right

The present paper examines the problem of cyber-attacks under existing international law. It takes the view that the (United Nations) UN Charter provisions on the use of force can be extended to cyber-attacks by means of interpretation although the relevant provisions do not explicitly address such issue. This Article argues that cyber-attacks resulting in material damage or destruction to property, death or injury to persons, or severe disruption of the functioning of critical infrastructures can be characterized as use of armed force and therefore violate the prohibition contained in article 2(4) of the Charter. However, cyber-attacks not resulting in the above consequences may be illegal intervention in the internal affairs of other states if such attacks are coercive in nature. In addition, the current study discusses that a cyber-attack which amounts to a use of armed force per se is not sufficient to give the victim state the right to self-defense, unless its scale and effects are equivalent to those of a conventional armed attack. Finally, the study concludes that an international cyber treaty is truly necessary to more effectively address cyber-attacks.

scholarly journals Customary International Rules in Contemporary International Law // Međunarodna običajna pravila u savremenom međunarodnom pravu

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 136
Author(s):  
Duško Glodić
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Community ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Practical Point ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Creation

This article explores the role and importance accorded to customary international law in contemporary international law. First of all, the author has explored a number of issues related to this topic. Particluarly, the manner in which norms of customary international law are being established through the relevant State practice and the formation of opinio juris, as well as how the changes in contemporary international relations generated some chages in custromary international law were examined from both theretical and practical point of view. Than, the article elaborated, in a more concrete manner, different ways of impact of changes in international relations and subjects of international law to the formation of customary international rules. It has also paid attention to the evolution in international law and its reflection to the creation of international legal norms, including customary rules. The article concluded that, despite an ever increasing number of treaties, customary rules are still present in international law and are important for regulation of international relations, thus ensuring that dynamics and developments within the international community are followed by the development of legal framework.

Demilitarizing Palestine

2019 ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
Louis René Beres
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
World System ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
System P ◽  
The World ◽  
National Leaders

In principle, at least, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made his country’s acceptance of Palestinian statehood contingent upon prior Palestinian “demilitarization.” This expressed contingency, however, is potentially contrary to pertinent international law, especially those norms regarding any sovereign state’s peremptory rights to self-defense. It follows, as this article will clarify, that potentially a new Palestinian state could permissibly abrogate any pre-independence commitments it had once made to remain demilitarized, and that reciprocally Israel ought never base its related security expectations upon any such mutable diplomatic promises. Ultimately most important, as the article concludes, is that national leaders all over the world finally begin to take seriously the organic “oneness” of our world legal order, and accordingly look toward identifying some promisingly coherent replacements for our time-dishonored Realpolitik or “Westphalian” world system.

The Effects of a State of War or Armed Conflict

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Mancini
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The United Nations

This chapter explores how a state of war or armed conflict affects the relations between belligerents, between belligerents and third states, and the belligerents’ subjects. It begins by describing how a state of war arose between two states, along with its far-reaching consequences, in classical international law. The effects on diplomatic relations, trade relations, treaties, and contracts are highlighted. The chapter then considers the prohibition on the use or threat of armed force in international relations and its implications for the concept of a state of war as well as the consequences traditionally attached to it. It also looks at state practice regarding the creation of a state of war in the United Nations era and concludes by analysing the effects of an interstate armed conflict in contemporary international law.

Sri Lanka

2019 ◽  
pp. 655-674
Author(s):  
Amrith Rohan Perera
Keyword(s):  
Sri Lanka ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Early Phase ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
Consultative Committee ◽  
European Origin ◽  
Direct Outcome

This chapter assesses international law in Sri Lanka. During the early phase of the post-1945 norm-creating process, Sri Lanka shared with the newly independent Afro-Asian states their collective concerns about ‘an inherited legal order’ of essentially European origin. As the international community expanded with the decolonization process, Sri Lanka played a leadership role with other emerging independent nations of Asia and Africa in helping a new legal order to evolve. The historic Bandung Conference of 1955 was a major landmark in these efforts. A direct outcome of the conference was the formation of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Committee, which provided a common platform for Asian-African states to articulate their concerns and forge common positions on important international legal initiatives. After reviewing these developments, the chapter discusses Sri Lanka’s role in the United Nations treaty formulation process in the field of the suppression of terrorism.

Self-Defense and the Israeli Wall Advisory Opinion: An Ipse Dixit from the ICJ?

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean D. Murphy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Icj ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

In October 2003, the Israeli permanent representative addressed the United Nations General Assembly on why Israel felt compelled to build a lengthy barrier spanning hundreds of kilometers across certain areas of the occupied West Bank of the Jordan River. Among other things, Ambassador Dan Gillernian stated: [A] security fence has proven itself to be one of the most effective non-violent methods lor preventing terrorism in the heart of civilian areas. The fence is a measure wholly consistent with the right of States to self-defence enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter. International law and Security Council resolutions, including resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001), have clearly recognized the right of States to use force in self-defence against terrorist attacks, and therefore surely recognize the right to use non-forcible measures to that end.

scholarly journals The Ukrainian Crisis: A Test for International Law?

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Marcin Marcinko ◽  
Bartosz Rogala
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
The Political ◽  
Hybrid Warfare ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Ukrainian Crisis

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine raises significant questions related to the fundamental features of international law. The chief concern is the efficacy of the said legal order as well as territorial integrity and right to self determination. Since the political crisis has led to a military clash, so-called hybrid warfare and the rules on occupation are also discussed. It seems the current geopolitical scene has led to what some perceive as a watering down of the rules of international law and further exposure of the flaws of the UN. International law, however, despite its shortcomings and limitations, still offers valid solutions to the international community as a way to solve not only the discussed conflict, but also many others.

scholarly journals Whither Democratic Legitimism?: Contextualizing Recent Developments in the Recognition and Non-recognition of Governments

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 213-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad R. Roth
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Balanced Assessment ◽  
Current State ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Recent Developments

Erika de Wet has provided a useful and balanced assessment of the current state of the international law of governmental illegitimacy. Her account quite rightly concludes that “democratic legitimacy is not yet a requirement for the recognition of ade juregovernment under customary international law.” What follows below seeks to expand on her observations in two ways: by developing somewhat further the doctrinal linkages to which she alludes; and by explaining the failure of a consistently legitimist state practice to materialize, in light of the dynamics of the legal order within which the question of governmental illegitimacy is embedded.

Sovereignty beyond the West: The End of Classical International Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnulf Becker Lorca
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Turn Of The Century ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The West ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Post War

AbstractThe historical processes through which international law became, conceptually, a universal legal order and, geographically, an order with a global scope of validity, are long and complex. These transformations, which began to appear during the second half of the nineteenth century, did not end until post-War-World-II decolonization. This article examines one particular aspect of these transformations: once non-Western states were admitted and begun to participate in the international community, did the rules of international law governing the interaction between Western and non-Western States change? What did it mean for semi-peripheral states to acquire sovereignty? The article argues that during the first decades of the twentieth century, semi-peripheral lawyers realized that sovereignty, so longed-for during the nineteenth century, conferred, under classical international law, much less autonomy and equality than they had anticipated. Moreover, at the turn of the century, the specific challenges faced by semi-peripheral states in their interaction with Western powers shifted, so that classical international law exhausted its power and stopped being useful. The article thus offers, from the perspective of the semi-periphery, an explanation of the shift from classical to modern international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document