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.

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.’...

7. Sovereignty over Territory

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
The People ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

Sovereignty is one of the fundamental concepts in international law. It is an integral part of the principles of equality of States, territorial integrity and political independence that are referred to in Article 2 of the United Nations Charter. Sovereignty is crucial to the exercise of powers by a State over both its territory and the people living in that territory. This chapter discusses traditional means of acquisition of territory; effective occupation; consent by other States; and limitations on sovereignty over territory.

The World Court and Jus Cogens

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon A. Christenson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
United Nations Charter

In the merits phase of decision in the case brought by Nicaragua against the United States, the World Court briefly mentions references by states or publicists to the concept of jus cogens. These expressions are used to buttress the Court’s conclusion that the principle prohibiting the use of force found in Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter is also a rule of customary international law.

2 The prohibition of the use of force

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gray Christine
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Cyber Attacks ◽  
Armed Force ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
Economic Coercion

This chapter examines the prohibition of the use of force contained in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which provides that ‘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 Purposes of the United Nations’. States and commentators generally agree that the prohibition is not only a treaty obligation but also customary law. However, there are disagreements between states on the interpretation and application of Article 2(4): does ‘the use of force’ include not only armed force but also economic coercion and, more recently, cyber attacks. Can humanitarian intervention ever be lawful? Is Responsibilty to Protect now a substitute for humanitarian intervention?

Retaliation and Reprisal

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

This chapter focuses on the evolution of the international law on the use of force as it relates to the concepts of retaliation and reprisal, particularly since the adoption of the United Nations Charter in 1945. After defining the concepts of retaliation and reprisal as understood in international law, the chapter considers whether armed reprisals are contrary to the UN Charter, along with the debates surrounding the UN Security Council’s condemnation of retaliatory actions. It then examines claimed instances of state practice, as well as judicial and scholarly views on the lawfulness of such reprisals. Finally, it discusses arguments calling for the revival of reprisals or retaliation as permitted exceptions to the prohibition on the use of force.

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.

scholarly journals FOXES IN THE HENHOUSE: LEGAL CRITIQUE TO THE “JUS BELLUM JUSTUM” DOCTRINE FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION THROUGH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (59) ◽  
pp. 47
Author(s):  
Henrique Jerônimo Bezerra MARCOS ◽  
Gustavo Rabay GUERRA
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Just War Doctrine ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

ABSTRACT Objective: The paper presents a legal analysis of R2P in light of contemporary international law. It questions whether R2P is lawful as a just war (jus bellum justum) doctrine under international law, specifically under the general prohibition for the use of force pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations. The paper first analyzes the just war doctrine in light of international law; thereafter, there is a study of the legal framework for the use of force in the United Nations Charter; and, in a third step, the study of the R2P in legal light as a just war doctrine. Methodology: The research is executed through a deductive approach, its scientific objective is exploratory, and its research technique is a bibliographical and documentary survey. The methodological limit is in a legal approach of the subject from a normative perspective, focused on the legal validity of the institute under international law. Results: It is concluded from the study that R2P has legal flaws and does not stand against United Nations Charter regulation on the usage of force, notably the norm that states that the use of force in international relations is an exclusive responsibility of the United Nations Security Council. Contributions: The study shows its pertinence as an endeavor into a strictly legal analysis of a complex and highly political subject of humanitarian interventions. Keywords: Responsibility to protect; humanitarian intervention; just war doctrine; United Nations Security Council. RESUMO Objetivo: O artigo apresenta uma análise jurídica da R2P à luz do Direito Internacional contemporâneo; questiona se a R2P é juridicamente válida como uma doutrina de guerra justa (jus bellum justum) sob o Direito Internacional, especificamente à luz da proibição geral de uso da força de acordo com a Carta das Nações Unidas. Para tanto, o artigo analisa a doutrina da guerra justa à luz do Direito Internacional; em seguida, estuda o marco legal para o uso da força na Carta da ONU; e, em terceiro lugar, estuda a R2P como uma doutrina de guerra justa. Metodologia:A pesquisa é executada através de abordagem dedutiva, seu objetivo científico é exploratório e sua técnica de pesquisa é bibliográfica e documental. O limite metodologia é uma abordagem legal do seu objeto em uma perspectiva normativa com foco na validade legal do instituto à luz do Direito Internacional.Resultados: Conclui-se do estudo que a R2P tem falhas jurídicas e não se coaduna com a normativa da Carta das Nações Unidas sobre o uso da força, notadamente a norma que estabelece que o uso da força nas relações internacionais é uma responsabilidade quase exclusiva do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas. Contribuições: O estudo mostra sua pertinência por se tratar de análise estritamente legal de um assunto complexo e altamente político que são as intervenções humanitárias. Palavras-chave: Responsabilidade de proteger; intervenção humanitária; doutrina da guerra justa; Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas.

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 THREATS OF FORCE: INTERNATIONAL LAW AND STRATEGY

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 263-264
Author(s):  
Peter Slinn
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
United Nations Charter

Dr Francis Grimal, Routledge 2012, ISBN-13: 978-0415609852, Price £70.40 hbDr Grimal’s monograph on the law of armed conflict relating to threats of force, is a significant contribution to the literature. It ventures along one of the most perilous corridors of uncertainty in modern international law, and attempts with commendable courage to set the legal issues in the context of modern international relations. As Professor Breau writes in her Foreword, the existing literature concentrates overwhelmingly on the actual use of force, and there is little academic analysis of the meaning and significance of the threat of force in terms of the reference in article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, to the duty of all members to ‘refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document