Search: self-defense
05 Apr Drone Warfare and the Koh Speech – A Roundup of Links
United States - this being the causal chain driving some of our current actions. The public will not, however, get behind calling such drone attacks "self-defense." The term self-defense implies to the public something you do in the face of an imminent, immediate threat - and whacking Pakistani militant chieftains out on the far end of that long causal chain is not it. Used to justify any targeted killing anywhere on the globe, "self-defense" sounds Orwellian. When "the international soft law community" makes this their "next big thing," you won't...
12 Jul Of Proxies, Self-Defence and Reprisals
...consulates) abroad are considered emanations of the state, Israel’s attack on Iran’s consulate in Syria is an armed attack against Iran to which Iran has the right to self-defence. The US has long held that attacks on diplomatic and consular missions can justify action in self-defence (including those against US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salam in 1998). Here, UN experts agreed that Iran has a right to respond, but argued it would be unnecessary as “self-defence is only lawful where it is necessary to stop a continuing armed attack”. Similarly,...23 Sep Does the Collective Self-Defense Justification Extend to Khorasan? If Not, Then Is There One?
Jordan Julian: you should read the responses to Jennifer's interesting post below. The claim of the U.S. (perhaps the advisors to Obama have not realized it yet) would be self-defense against continual armed attacks by al Qaeda and its affiliates....03 Jan Dershowitz on Israel and Proportionality
...the right to engage in self-defense against armed attacks. The only limitation international law places on a democracy is that its actions must satisfy the principle of proportionality. As Marko Milanovic explains today at EJIL: Talk!,”[t]his is simply not self-defense within the meaning of Article 51 of the UN Charter, as that concept of self-defense is an exception to the general prohibition on the use of force, that operates between states only and exclusively and is enshrined in Article 2(4) of the Charter. That prohibition was not triggered by Israel’s...
17 Jan Legal Principles Matter in Defense of Democracies
...authority to respond to a Ukrainian request for assistance, including armed force. So, while the collective self-defense obligation of Article 5 of the NATO treaty does not embrace non-NATO Ukraine, the inherent right of collective self-defense under international law and the UN Charter applies. The allied governments of NATO should unequivocally signal that they do not shy away from inherent collective self-defense of Ukraine or any other nation invaded by an aggressor state. Otherwise, Putin may miscalculate that the absence of a treaty obligation for self-defense deprives the United States...03 Apr Why Al-Kibar Does Not Contribute to Pre-Emptive Self-Defence
reasoning, the relatively muted international response could suggest that members of the international community might be willing to entertain preemptive self-defense under such extreme circumstances. In sum, the question of whether international law now recognizes a right to preemptive self-defense against nuclear threats remains highly contested. But the evolution of the international position from “Opera” to “Outside the Box,” even after Israel acknowledged its role in the latter, is telling. Both scholars and politicians will likely take this evolution into account in discerning state practice on this question going forward....27 Apr Quote of the Day — The IMT on the Use of Armed Force in Self-Defense
From the Judgment: It was further argued that Germany alone could decide, in accordance with the reservations made by many of the Signatory Powers at the time of the conclusion of the Briand-Kellogg Pact, whether preventive action was a necessity, and that in making her decision final judgment was conclusive. But whether action taken under the claim of seIf-defense was in fact aggressive or defensive must ultimately be subject to investigation and adjudication if international law is ever to be enforced. Smart people, those Allied judges....15 May The Boundaries of the Battlefield
...breached the laws of neutrality. Benjamin Davis "If not, (in the self-defense paradigm) has the host state shown itself to be unwilling and/or unable to apprehend the targeted individuals? What is the standard that should be used to make the unwilling/unable determination? " Can the host state invoke its Article 51 right of self-defense against the state actor party in the NIAC who acts in its territory without its consent? Can the host state invoke its mutual defense treaty with other states against the state actor party in the NIAC...12 Sep Mike Lewis Is Wrong About the Nature of Self-Defence
agree with you that if any intervening state truly acts in self-defense, then the state where the intervention is taking place cannot argue that the intervening nation acted aggressively. However, it is worth pointing out that just because a state says it is acting in self-defense, it does not mean that it is rightfully acting in self-defense. Many states have argued self-defense for actions that could be easily perceived as aggression. I would thus disagree that any time a state "argues" it is acting in self-defense, this "cures" the sovereignty...28 May Drones and the CIA and Charlie Savage’s NYT Article
...of "levee en masse" type action that would help them be lawful combatants? Or, assuming the U.S. self-defense model, would the Pakistan Taliban consider themselves as under attack once the conflict moved from Af to Pak and therefore assert a right of self-defense in the autonomous regions to which the local leadership (local political authority) appears to be acquiescing. Their reasons may be completely due to domestic self-defense concerns and oblivious to the Al-Qaeda interests that may - objectively - be identical means but for different ends. For example, from...