国际法Chapter 9.ppt

CHAPTER 9LIMITATION OF THE USE OF FORCE 9.1 PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF FORCE A. Traditional view: states had right to use force to resolve at least certain kinds of international disputes (i.e. those affecting essential state interests). B. In 20th century, number of attempts to limit the legal freedom of the sovereign state to pursue war as the ultimate instrument of national policy. 9.2 JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE USE OF FORCE The Right of Self-Defence A. At customary international law: subject to requirements of necessity and proportionality B. Right preserved in U.N. Charter Article 51 C. Have developments in the last few years changed the parameters of the right of self-defence, particularly 9/11? . Defence of Nationals A. Subject to same requirements of necessity and proportionality. B. More controversial, but accepted in certain circumstances. In the case of the Entebbe raid (Israel invading Uganda to rescue hostages), the U.S. representative on the Security Council stated that “the assessment of the legality of Israeli actions depends heavily on the unusual circumstances of this specific case.” Invitation A. Always accepted at international law that a state could intervene militarily within a state at the request of the government of that state, essentially consent. - always subject to withdraw of invitation B. Difficulties arise where a government is not seen as exercising effective control. Can another state intervene to bolster a government that would otherwise be unable to keep itself in power? E.g. Panama, democratically elected president unable to come into power invited US. .Humanitarian Intervention A. Tied in to concept of “gross breach of international law”: in situations where the government of a state has shown blatant disregard for the rights of its citizens, and treated them in a clearly inhumane fashion, another state may take action to remedy the situation. B. Has always been controversial because of concerns over misuse of the d