Search: self-defense
21 Feb US Involvement in Croatian War Crimes?
...the paper alleged, was angry at the Serbs for having overrun the UN protected Bosnian “safe area” of Srebrenica the previous month and wanted them punished. [snip] Gotovina has pled not guilty to the war crimes charges levied by the Hague tribunal. News reports have indicated that Gotovina’s lawyers may be planning to rest his defense on the American participation in the offensive. Because these allegations come courtesy of Gotovina’s defense team, it’s easy to dismiss them as self-serving. They’re given credence, however, by the fact that — according to...31 Jul Correcting a Common Misperception of the Espionage Act
...scienter is established. Where there is no occasion for secrecy, as with reports relating to national defense, published by authority of Congress or the military departments, there can, of course, in all likelihood, be no reasonable intent to give an advantage to a foreign government. Notice: the Gorin Court did not limit “bad faith” to obtaining national-defense information with the “intent” to injure the United States; it also considered bad faith obtaining national-defense information while having “reason to believe” that the information could be used to injure the US. Those...08 May Dr. Mohamed Helal’s Defense of Russia’s Syria Vetoes & Power Politics – A Rejoinder to His Criticism of My Post
[Jennifer Trahan is an Associate Clinical Professor at the NYU Center for Global Affairs.] In his Opinio Juris post on May 4, Dr. Mohamed Helal provides a defense of Russia’s veto use related to the situation in Syria, one that he defends as in line with the negotiations of the UN Charter and a vision of veto power of the permanent members of the Security Council as a virtual carte blanche. There is some merit to his argument; indeed, it appears to correspond with how at least certain permanent members...02 Mar YJIL Online Symposium: Response to Gabriella Blum
— should perhaps factor into a lesser-humanitarian-evil principle or criminal defense.) Might an unintended consequence of Professor Blum’s proposal, designed to provide military operators and planners with more humanitarian-protective flexibility, be to further shift the locus of debates about the interpretation of IHL and resolution of its most difficult dilemmas from State practice to international criminal tribunals? There are probably some very good reasons for using a criminal law defense as a mechanism for adapting IHL in the way Professor Blum proposes, including that it helps ensure that a new...24 Nov Meanwhile, China Draws a Provocative, Dangerous, But Perfectly Legal Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea
I don’t have any insights to offer on the big news this weekend, that legally-non binding-UNSC-resolution-violating agreement in Geneva. But I did want to note one other big sort-of-law news item from the other side of the world: China’s announcement that it is drawing an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea, including over the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. China’s announcement has riled up both Japan (which has declared it “totally unacceptable”) and the United States (which has expressed “deep concerns.”) Why all the fuss? China’s new ADIZ...26 Sep Preparing for Trumpxit: Could a President Trump Withdraw the U.S. from International Treaties and Agreements?
...unilateral authority to withdraw the U.S. from treaties which specify terms for withdrawal and which don’t require further alterations or changes to domestic U.S. law. Defense Treaties/Military Alliances This suggests that a President Trump could terminate NATO and the US-Japan Defense Treaty pursuant to those treaties’ withdrawal provisions. Interestingly, the NATO Treaty Article 13 specifies that “Any Party” can terminate their membership with one year’s notice. That notice must be sent to the U.S. Government. So I guess a President Trump could give himself a one year’s notice? Because the...09 Nov New Defense Department Directive on Detainee Interrogations
As the Washington Post reports, the Defense Department has released a new directive to the military on rules governing the interrogation of detainees held in U.S. military custody around the world. According to the Post, the directive has been hotly debated within the administration, especially as Congress is currently considering the McCain bill to codify standards on the treatment of detainees. Here is the key paragraph, from my quick review. It is DoD policy that: All captured or detained personnel shall be treated humanely, and all intelligence interrogations, debriefings, or...09 May US Reaffirms Defense Commitment to Philippines. What Does That Mean?
According to the Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs, the U.S. government has recently re-affirmed its obligations to defend the Philippines under the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty. This is a particularly sensitive time to re-affirm this commitment, given the ongoing tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea. But what exactly is the U.S. committing to here? Would the U.S. actually feel obligated to defend Filipino claims to disputed islands and territories in the South China Sea? Let’s go to the text of the treaty: Article IV Each...05 Apr The Problem with Saddam’s “The Executions Were Legal” Defense
...al-Jaafari asked Saddam about his approval for death sentences passed against the 148 by his Revolutionary Court, which prosecutors have argued gave the Shiites only a cursory trial. “That is one of the duties of the president,” Saddam replied. “I had the right to question the judgment. But I was convinced the evidence that was presented was sufficient” to show their guilt in the assassination attempt. As I have explained in more detail over at the Grotian Moment, there is a fatal flaw — literally — with Saddam’s defense: at...
31 Mar Options for a Peace Settlement for Ukraine: Option Paper I – Neutrality and Related Concepts
...NATO’s repeated confirmation that it will maintain in place its ‘Open Door’ policy. However, if Ukraine itself declares that it will not seek NATO membership, NATO could record its understanding of this commitment. Assurances by NATO Members: Second, key NATO members could offer assurances that Ukraine will not obtain membership. This could occur, for instance in the shape of the US side letter to an angreement, provided Ukraine first declares itself that it will not seek membership. Self-Limitation: Ukraine itself would rule out NATO membership. If so, the question arises...