Search: self-defense

...for these insurmountable workloads was to switch to a part-time contract. So, although I have worked above and beyond contractual hours for years now, I would be rewarded with a 20% or 40% pay cut, just to cope in academia? Then how would I cope financing a household on my own? On the flip side, when successes come, the feeling of external affirmation is such a salve for low self-esteem. Fragile self-worth seeking these moments is a recipe for disaster, because complex personal circumstances simply do not allow me to...

...order to argue in a fairly straightforward manner that the almost complete physical and cultural destruction of Native Americans was an act of self-defence and self-preservation. We are particularly astounded because this has been a standard trope to justify imperial violence, domination, and expansionism for centuries. From the 1857 Indian Rebellion to ‘Jewish financial terrorism’ the white racist imaginary is structured around supposed existential threats to which it is responding ‘defensively’. Nowadays, arguments about ‘white genocide’, ‘anti-white racism’ and the ‘white pride and self-preservation’ are at the centre of the...

...Covenant or UN Charter. They are meaningful, but what we do with them is more meaningful. When I draw a parallel between self-preservation and self-defence, it is to warn against the effects of extensive interpretations of Article 51. If one believes that the uses and abuses of self-preservation ‘eviscerated any putative rule of non-intervention’, then the book is an invitation to reflect critically on what we are doing now.  This brings me to two questions, one by Helal and one by Ingo Venzke: Was the narrative successful in resuscitating confidence...

...defend yourself. It can’t be that you can use as much force in self-defence that you think will be enough to finish them off forever, and they’ll never come back for 100 years. And because I’m acting in self-defence I can use as much force as I want. But that’s controversial. Some people seem to feel that once the conflict has started, and you have shown the necessity of self-defence, you can use as much force as you like within the rules of international humanitarian law, and that means that...

...strikes with the United Nations (UN) Charter and the general prohibition on the use of force under international law. This post will focus on this last matter. Before delving into some of the key legal issues, it should be noted that the US strikes contrast with the position previously adopted by the US, whereby it directed its military force towards the fight against the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) under its umbrella of ‘the war on terror’ on the basis of self-defence, as opposed to directing...

...State may invoke self-defence only when it has been the victim of an “armed attack”. If that condition is satisfied, any defensive use of force is subject to the requirements of necessity and proportionality (ICJ Nicaragua, para. 194). A State that acts in self-defence without respecting these conditions and requirements violates the prohibition of the use of force under article 2(4) of the UN Charter and customary international law. In most serious cases, such use of force may qualify as an act of aggression. Turkey identified the following circumstances as...

...sovereign state through utilizing either of the two exceptions to prohibition on the use of force in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter: (1) UNSC authorization; and/or (2) use of force for the purpose of self-defence (under Article 51). Self-Defence: To Be Preventive or Pre-emptive? That Is the Question! Iraq’s ignorance in acting in conformity to the demands and purposes of Resolution 660 which condemned Iraq’s unlawful invasion to Kuwait, brought forth Resolution 678. The latter Resolution gave power to all member states to “use all necessary means to uphold...

...agreed to allow the PLO, their political representatives, to establish institutions to exercise self-governing powers in the West Bank and Gaza. This was pursuant to the Declaration of Principles (DoP), in which Israel and the PLO agreed that the aim of the negotiations was to establish a Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority for the Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, “for a transitional period not exceeding five years, leading to a permanent settlement based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338”. It was also agreed that the...

...area of treaty law is messy for a variety of reasons that I won’t go into here. Suffice to say that there is substantial disagreement in the courts, and even more disagreement in the legal academy, as to how and whether to give a treaty self-executing effect. What the Supreme Court might (but probably won’t) do is clarify this very murky and fuzzy area of the law. Or, as is more likely, they may confuse matters even further. *For a defense of Scalia not recusing himself in Hamdan, see here....

...the purported “peace support functions” the shortest of their kind in history. On 22 February, President Putin signed the Federal Laws on the ratification of both treaties (see here and here). In accordance with Article 4 of both identical treaties, the Contracting Parties “shall provide each other with necessary, including military, assistance in the exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter”. “Self-Defence” In his televised address of 24 February 2022, President Putin mentioned “self-defence” as a justification for the...

...all treaties.) And the Supreme Court’s decision that the U.N. Charter is not self-executing, coming 63 years after its ratification, has sent State Department lawyers scrambling to determine how many other treaties might also not be self-executing. 3. Part III of the article — “How International Law Comes Home” — is an especially valuable and well-documented compendium of the different ways treaties are applied in U.S. courts. 4. Part IV of the article includes several practical suggestions for ensuring enforcement of treaties in U.S. courts. I agree that a Clear...

...Japan relinquished sovereignty, but there is no transfer mechanism. Some argue Aquisitive Prescription (e.g. Goa) but that fails here as there is considerable objection to any Chinese claim to Taiwan, which precludes Aquisitive Prescription. US defense of Taiwan would not only be legal, but justice and consistent with US values. My concern is that Obama is such a weak president that the US might just sit on the sidelines. Guy Again, if the point is "the increasing irrelevance of Article 51 of the UN Charter to decisions by major powers...