Search: self-defense
12 Mar Peter Berkowitz’s Unconvincing Justification of “Preventive” Self-Defense
always presumed a right of anticipatory self-defense that is significantly broader than the Webster test.” Berkowitz offers precisely one piece of evidence in support of that claim — a 1914 statement by Elihu Root, then a U.S. senator, at an ASIL conference. That’s it. Berkowitz does not even explain why, if the U.S. believed that the customary scope of self-defense extended well beyond Caroline‘s “imminence” standard, Webster would have specifically relied on that standard to criticize the British attack — which the British Foreign Minister later agreed was the correct...10 Nov Our So-Called GWOT and Anticipatory Self-Defense
Daniel C. Barr (a U.S. lawyer). As I had mentioned in an earlier post, Guiora has been grappling in his scholarship with the issue of legal regulation of anticipatory self-defense both under U.S. and international law; this op-ed tries to rescue the idea of anticipatory self-defense from the excesses of the Bush Administration and argues for requiring participation of the other branches in decision-making. They wrote, in part: Unlike much of the last seven years… pre-emptive attacks must be based upon the objective analysis of viable, valid and corroborated intelligence....10 Apr More on the Inherent Right of Self-Defense
In a comment to my earlier post on humanitarian intervention and natural rights, Adil Haque asks me the following question: Can States voluntarily make binding agreements that curtail their natural rights of legitimate defense for the sake of greater collective security? Here’s my answer. The positive law can expand the natural right but cannot curtail it. To explain my answer, let’s think a little bit more about domestic law. Consider the right of self-defense under domestic criminal law. Suppose a state decided to repeal its criminal law defenses of self-defense...05 Jun Marko Milanovic on Self-Defense
...regardless of what is the correct legal position regarding the imminence of a threat, anticipatory self-defense and so forth, it is perfectly irrelevant for the basic argument that I was trying to make, and that is that self-defense is as such incapable of precluding the wrongfulness of violations of human rights law, if human rights law in fact applies. Howard Gilbert I think this question can be simplified by taking the issue of self-defense off the table. The Duchy of Grand Fenwick invades the US without any pretense of self-defense....16 Nov A Short Response to Ilya Somin: Does Self-Defense Mean the U.S. Can Invade and Occupy Syria?
as a pre-authorization to the President to defend treaty allies with military force as if it were an attack on the United States.But this reading calls into question how much military force the President can use under this “pure” self defense rationale. Surely, President Bush was authorized to defend U.S. territory on 9/11 and its immediate aftermath. But did the 9/11 attacks also authorize the President to start bombing, and then to invade Afghanistan, without going back to Congress? In other words, does the self-defense rationale allow all offensive actions...06 Apr Question on 2007 Strike Against Syria and Anticipatory Self-Defense
...a principle of customary international law. (I would pause here to stress that while Marty refers in his post to those who accept some form of "anticipatory self-defense", this should be distinguished from "preventative self-defense" which was at the core of the so-called Bush doctrine. The strike on Syria, and any strike on Iran today, falls within the category of preventative self-defense, being a use of force in response to the possible materialization of a perceived risk in the future, in contrast to anticipatory self-defense, which is a use of...01 Mar Journalists and Self-Defense in Iraq
that they take no action adversely affecting their status as civilians. The question, then, is whether a civilian who carries a weapon in self-defense would be taking an “action adversely affecting their status as civilians.” The answer appears to be “no.” Under Article 13 of Protocol II, which elaborates and strengthens common Article 3’s basic rules, “[c]ivilians shall enjoy the protection afford by this Part, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.” Carrying a weapon in self-defense would not qualify as taking a “direct...
09 Mar Article 103 to the Rescue: A Few Thoughts on the Legality of Russian Claims Under the Genocide Convention, Jus Cogens Duties and Preventive Self-defense
...down law alley, this is an abuse of right. Ukraine is free to join whatever collective security arrangements it deems appropriate (without prejudice to the ability of Russia to attempt to deter or dissuade them by diplomatic and legal means) as a function of its sovereignty. Attempting to coerce Ukraine by force into abandoning its bid for NATO membership is the functional equivalent of claiming preventive self-defense. This is, in many ways, a destiny of NATO and friends’ own making. The claims for preventive self-defense put forth by the US...15 Apr The Right of Self-Defense Includes “Offensive” Cyber Attacks
That very trendy and useful legal concept – the right of self-defense — is not just for targeting U.S. citizens to be killed. The U.S. military’s new “Cyber Command” chief has asserted that the U.S. government’s right of self-defense almost certainly permits it to take offensive “cyber” attacks. … commanders have clear rights to self-defense, he said. He added that while “this right has not been specifically established by legal precedent to apply to attacks in cyberspace, it is reasonable to assume that returning fire in cyberspace, as long as...03 Oct Guiora on Re-Evaluating Anticipatory Self-Defense: Is There a Role for the Judiciary?
these essays): Muge Kinacioglu (Department of International Relations, Bilkent University, Turkey), A Response to Amos Guiora: Reassessing the Parameters of Use of Force in the Age of Terrorism: Pre-emptive Action and International Law. Tarcisio Gazzini (Faculty of Law, VU University, Amsterdam), A Response to Amos Guiora’s Article on Pre-Emptive Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors. I think Amos’ article will be somewhat controversial to both the political Left and the Right: to the Left, for his defense of a conception of anticipatory self-defense and to the Right for his view that such...