Abstract
This chapter introduces the subject and main research questions of this book. First, a succinct presentation of the concept of self-defence and the controversies surrounding its anticipatory aspect is given. Secondly, the debate concerning the elements and temporal dimension of self-defence is elaborated and the different opinion groups regarding the legality of anticipatory action are described. Thirdly, the structure of the book and the research methods employed are portrayed. The last paragraphs of this chapter elaborate on the envisaged contribution of the present work to the debate regarding the temporality of self-defence.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Bush (1 June 2002) Graduation Speech at West Point.
- 2.
Interview With Jacques Chirac (9 September 2002).
- 3.
The Bush Administration Preemption Doctrine and the Future of World 2004, pp. 325–337.
- 4.
Zoller 2004, pp. 334–335.
- 5.
UN High-Level Panel 2004, para 188, p. 54.
- 6.
Ibid., para 188.
- 7.
Ibid., paras 190–191. For criticism of the findings of the panel, see Corten 2007, 217–232.
- 8.
The Chatham House Principles 2006, p. 964.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
According to Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the other main exception to the general prohibition to use force is the Security Council-controlled collective enforcement action. Also, there is a growing literature discussing humanitarian intervention as a possible third exception to the prohibition. See, for instance, Evans 2008; Lillich 1986; Tesón 2005.
- 12.
- 13.
Nicaragua 1986, para 176.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
For instance, the Tokyo Tribunal held that the Netherlands was entitled to defend itself against a Japanese war of aggression (see infra 7.5). In the Nicaragua case, the ICJ used Article 3 of GA Res. 3314, Definition of Aggression to elucidate on the meaning of ‘armed attack’. Nicaragua 1986, para 195. For main discussion see infra 11.1. See also: Alexandrov 1996, pp. 105–120; Constantinou 2000, pp. 57–62; Malanczuk 1987, p. 244; Ruys 2010, pp. 127–139.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23.
- 24.
Gardam 2004, p. 149.
- 25.
Ibid., pp. 149–153.
- 26.
- 27.
Abi Saab 1987, p. 371; Badr 1980, p. 25; Brownlie 1963, pp. 275–278; Cassese 2005, pp. 361–362 (Cassese offers de lege ferenda proposal for a possible future regulation of ‘anticipatory self-defence’, ibid., pp. 362–363); Constantinou 2000, pp. 120–121; Corten 2008, p. 619; Gray 2004, pp. 98–99; Henkin 1991; Jessup 1948, p. 166; Kolesnik 1989, p. 154; Kunz 1947, p. 878; Ruys 2010, pp. 259–262.
- 28.
- 29.
- 30.
Badr 1980, p. 25; Badr Myjer and White 2002, p. 7. Abi Saab contends that if the armed attack is instant (such as a bombardment or short incursion), self-defence cannot be exercised after the attack finishes. Self-defence against occupation, however, can be exercised, because that constitutes an attack extended in time. Abi Saab 1987, p. 373.
- 31.
- 32.
- 33.
- 34.
- 35.
See infra 11.2.1. Summary Record of the 1627th ILC meeting, UN Doc. A/CN.4/SR.1627 (1980) para 3 (comment by Tsuruoka)..
- 36.
- 37.
- 38.
- 39.
Dinstein 2005, p. 191.
- 40.
Ruys 2010, p. 253.
- 41.
- 42.
Bowett 1958, pp. 188–189; Fleck 1988, pp. 176–177; Higgins 1963, p. 199; Malanczuk 1987, pp. 247–248; McDougal and Feliciano 1961, pp. 231–236; Schachter 1991, pp. 150–152; Schwebel 1972, p. 481; Waldock 1952, pp. 497–499. In a series of correspondence between the US and Britain, then US Secretary of State, Daniel Webster, called upon the British government to show ‘a necessity of self-defence, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation’ in order to justify the exercise of self-defence in the Caroline incident of 1837. Webster 1841, p. 1138.
- 43.
- 44.
- 45.
- 46.
- 47.
- 48.
- 49.
- 50.
US National Security Strategy 2002, Part V.
- 51.
- 52.
See supra 1.2.
- 53.
- 54.
- 55.
- 56.
This assertion can be deduced from the materialistic approach to customary law. For criticism of this school of thought, see Koskenniemi 1989, pp. 401–402.
- 57.
- 58.
Brownlie 1963, pp. 1–2.
- 59.
- 60.
Nicaragua 1986, para 176.
- 61.
- 62.
- 63.
See for instance: Redslob 1923.
- 64.
See for instance: de la Pradelle 1950.
- 65.
Koskenniemi 2001, p. 65.
- 66.
Hueck 2001, pp. 198–199.
- 67.
Walzer 2006, pp. 44 et seq.
- 68.
Bellamy 2006, pp. 2 et seq.
- 69.
Neff 2005, pp. 2 et seq.
- 70.
Bellamy 2006, pp. 8 et seq.
- 71.
Neff 2005, pp. 3 et seq.
- 72.
- 73.
See infra 1.4 for details on the understanding given to the term.
- 74.
- 75.
Byers 1999, pp. 130–142.
- 76.
Ibid., pp. 133–136.
- 77.
- 78.
- 79.
- 80.
For instance, Kelsen 1939, p. 262.
- 81.
- 82.
Tunkin 1958, p. 10.
- 83.
Tunkin 1961, p. 420.
- 84.
Ibid.
- 85.
D’Amato 1971, pp. 97–98.
- 86.
Koskenniemi 1989, p. 403.
- 87.
- 88.
- 89.
See, for instance, Cheng 1965, pp. 35–36.
- 90.
- 91.
Koskenniemi1989, p. 363.
- 92.
The Nicaragua case offered, inter alia, an elaborate analysis of the theory of customary international law. It discussed the relationship between treaty and custom, as well as the elements of a customary rule. For the purpose of this section, only the assertion regarding the elements of customary law will be discussed. Nicaragua 1986, paras 183–186. See infra 11.4.4, for the discussion regarding the relationship between treaty and customary law as well as self-defence.
- 93.
- 94.
- 95.
Nicaragua 1986, para 186.
- 96.
Ibid.
- 97.
Ibid.
- 98.
Schachter 1989, pp. 730–734. Schachter discusses the various sources from which opinio juris can be inferred, such as UN General Assembly resolutions, records of discussions, expert opinions as well as decisions of the ICJ and some treaty provisions can all contribute, under certain conditions, to infer opinio juris.
- 99.
GA Res. 2625, Friendly Relations Declaration.
- 100.
Nicaragua 1986, para 188.
- 101.
- 102.
Reichberg et al. 2006, pp. 288, 339–340, 371–372, 385–386.
- 103.
Franck 2002, p. 52.
- 104.
References
Abi Saab G (1987) Cours general du droit public. Recueil des Cours 207(1987-VII):9–463
Akehurst M (1976) Custom as a source of international law. British Year b Int Law 47:1–53
Alexandrov S (1996) Self-defense against the use of force in international law. Kluwer Law International, The Hague
Anzilotti D (1928) Corso di diritto internationale. Atheneum, Roma
Armed activities on the territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment of 19 December 2005, ICJ Rep. (2005)
Badr GM (1980) The exculpatory effect of self-defence in state responsibility. Ga J Int Comp Law 10:1–28
Bellamy AJ (2006) Just wars: from Cicero to Iraq. Polity Press, Cambridge
Bowett DW (1958) Self-defense in international law. Manchester University Press, Manchester
Brownlie I (1963) International law and the use of force by states. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Brownlie I (1986) Comparative approaches to the theory of international law: remarks. Am Soc Int Law Proc 80:154–157
Bush GW (1 June 2002) Graduation Speech at West Point. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html. Accessed 21 January 2010
Byers M (1999) Custom, power and the power of rules: international relations and customary international law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Cahier P (1985) Changements et continuité du droit international: cours général de droit international public. Recueil des Cours 195(1985-VI):9–374
Cassese A (2001) Terrorism is also disrupting some crucial legal categories of international law. Eur J Int Law 12:993–1001
Cassese A (2005) International Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Cheng B (1965) United Nations resolutions on outer space: ‘instant’ international customary law? Indian J Int Law 5:23–48
Christakis T (2005) Existe-t-il un droit de légitime défense en cas de simple “menace”?: une réponse au “groupe des personnalités de haut niveau” de l’ONU. In: Société française pour le droit international, Les métamorphoses de la sécurité collective: droit, pratique et enjeux stratégiques. Pedone, Paris, pp 197–222
Christopher P (2004) The ethics of war and peace: an introduction to legal and moral issues. Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
Constantinou A (2000) The right of self-defence under customary international law and Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Sakkoulas, Athens
Corten O (2007) Le débat sur la légitime défense préventive à l’occasion des 60 ans de l’ONU: nouvelles revendications, oppositions persistantes. In: Kherad R (ed) Légitimes défenses: colloque international organisé par le Laboratoire Angevin de Recherches sur les Actes Juridiques en collab. avec le Centre d’Études sur la Coopération Juridique International. LGDJ, Paris, pp 217–232
Corten O (2008) Le droit contre la guerre: l’interdiction du recours à la force en droit international contemporain. Pedone, Paris
D’Amato AA (1971) The concept of custom in international law. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Détais J (2007) Les critéres du droit de légitime défense dans la jurisprudence de la Cour Internationalde de Justice. In: Kherad R (ed) Légitimes défenses: colloque international organisé par le Laboratoire Angevin de Recherches sur les Actes Juridiques en collab. avec le Centre d’Études sur la Coopération Juridique International. LGDJ, Paris, pp 149–171
Dinstein Y (2005) War, aggression and self-defence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Dixon M (2000) Textbook on international law. Blackstone Press, London
Evans GJ (2008) The responsibility to protect: ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Fleck D (1988) Rules of engagement for maritime forces and the limitation of the use of force under the UN Charter. Ger Yearb Int Law 31:165–186
Franck T ((2002)) Recourse to force: state action against threats and armed attacks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
GA Res. 2625: General Assembly Resolution 2625 (1970) Friendly Relations Declaration
Gardam JG (1993) Proportionality and force in international law. Am J Int Law 87:391–413
Gardam JG (2004) Necessity, proportionality and the use of force by states. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Gazzini T (2005) The changing rules on the use of force in international law. Manchester University Press, Manchester
Gill TD (2007) The temporal dimension of self-defence. In: Schmitt M, Pejic J (eds) International law and armed conflict: exploring the faultlines. Essays in honour of Yoram Dinstein. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 113–155
Gray C (2004) International law and the use of force. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Gray C (2008) International law and the use of force. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Green JA (2009) The International Court of Justice and self-defence in international law. Hart, Oxford
Greenwood C (2003) International law and the pre-emptive use of force: Afghanistan, Al-Qaida and Iraq. San Diego Int Law J 4:7–38
Grewe WG (2000) The epochs of international law (trans: Byers M). De Gruyter, Berlin
Henkin L (1991) The use of force: law and US policy. In: Henkin et al (eds) Right v. Might. international law and the use of force. Council on Foreign Relations Press, New York, pp 37–69
Henkin L (1995) International law: politics and values. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht
Higgins R (1963) The development of international law through the political organs of the United Nations. Oxford University Press, London
Hill C (2004) The Bush Administration preemption doctrine and the future of world order: remark. Am Soc Int Law Proc 98:329–331
Hueck IJ (2001) The discipline of the history of international law: new trends and methods on the history of international law. J Hist Int Law 3:194–217
Interview with Jacques Chirac (9 September 2002), New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/09/international/europe/09CTEX.html. Accessed 26 January 2011
Jessup PC (1948) A modern law of nations: an introduction. Macmillan, New York
Kelsen H (1939) Théorie du droit international coutumier. Revue international de la theorie du droit (New Series) 1:25–57
Kelsen H (1966) Principles of international law. Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York
Kolb R (2004) Self-defense and preventive war at the beginning of the millennium. Zeitschrift für öffentliches recht 59(2):111–134
Kolesnik DN (1989) The development of the right to self-defence. In: Butler WE (ed) The non-use of force in international law. Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp 153–159
Kooijmans PH (2009) The legality of the use of force in the recent case law of the International Court of Justice. In: Yee S, Morin JY (eds) Multiculturalism and international law––essays in honour of Edward McWhinney. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 455–466
Koskenniemi M (1989) From apology to utopia: the structure of international legal argument. Lakimiesliiton Kustannus, Helsinki
Koskenniemi M (2001) Why history of international law today? Rechtsgeschichte 4:61–66
Kunz J (1947) Individual and collective self-defence in Article 51 of the Charter of the UN. Am J Int Law 41:872–879
Lachs M (1980) The development and general trends of international law in our time. Recueil des Cours 169(1980-IV):9–377
Lillich RB (ed) (1986) Humanitarian intervention and the United Nations. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville
Lubell N (2010) Extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Malanczuk P (1987) Countermeasures and self-defence as circumstances precluding wrongfulness in the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on States Responsibility. In: Spinedi M, Simma B (eds) United Nations codification of state responsibility. Oceana, New York, pp 197–286
Malanczuk P (1997) Akehurst’s modern introduction to international law. Routledge, London
McDougal MS (1963) The Soviet-Cuban quarantine and self-defense. Am J Int Law 57:597–604
McDougal MS, Feliciano FP (1961) Law and minimum world public order: the legal regulation of international coercion. Yale University Press, New Haven
Myjer PJ, White ND (2002) The twin towers attack: an unlimited right to self-defence? J Confl Secur Law 7:5–17
Neff SC (2005) War and the law of nations: general history. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Nicaragua 1986: Military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. USA), Judgment of 27 June 1986, ICJ Rep. (1986)
Pierson C (2004) Preemptive self-defence in an age of weapons of mass destruction: Operation Iraqi Freedom. Denver J Int Law Policy 33:150–178
de la Pradelle AG (1950) Maîtres et doctrines du droit des gens. Editions internationales, Paris
Redslob R (1923) Histoire des grands principes du droit des gens depuis l’antiquité jusqu’à la veille de la grande guerre. Rousseau, Paris
Reichberg GM, Syse H. Begby E (eds) (2006) The ethics of war: classic and contemporary readings. Blackwell, Malden
Roelofsen CG (1993–1994) History of the law of nations. A few remarks apropos some recent and not so recent publications. Grotiana 13–14:52–58
Ruys T (2010) ‘Armed attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter. Evolutions in customary law and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Schachter O (1989) Entangled treaty and custom. In: Dinstein Y (ed) International law at a time of perplexity. Essays in honour of Shabtai Rosenne. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp 717–738
Schachter O (1991) International law in theory and practice. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht
Schachter O (1992) Implementing limitations on the use of force: the doctrine of proportionality and necessity. Am Soc Int Law Proc 86:39–40
Schmitt C (1995) Staat, Grossraum, Nomos. Arbeiten aus den Jahren 1916–1969, Maschke G (ed), Duncker & Humblot, Berlin
Schwebel SM (1972) Aggression, intervention and self-defence in modern international law. Recueil des Cours 136(1972-II): 411–497
Simma B (ed) (1995) The Charter of the United Nations, A commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Steiger H (2001) From the international law of Christianity to the international law of the world citizen: reflections on the formation of epochs of the history of international law. J Hist Int Law 3:180–193
Strupp K (1934) Les règles générales du droit de la paix. Récueil des Cours 47:259–595
Taft WH, Buchwald TF (2003) Preemption, Iraq, and international law. Am J Int Law 97:557–563
Tesón FR (2005) Humanitarian intervention: an inquiry into law and morality. Transnational Ardsley, NY
The Bush Administration preemption doctrine and the future of world order (2004) Am Soc Int Law Proc 98:325–337
The Chatham House principles of international law on the use of force in self-defence (2006) Int Comp Law Q 55: 963–972
Tunkin GI (1958) Co-existence and international law. Recueil des Cours 95:1–81
Tunkin GI (1961) Remarks on the juridical nature of customary norms of international law. Calif Law Rev 49:419–430
Twiss T (1860) Law of nations considered as independent political communities, vol. 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford
UN high level panel: Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (2004). United Nations. http://www.un.org/secureworld/report2.pdf. Accessed 1 February 2011
US National Security Strategy (2002) The White House (2002) The National Security Strategy of the United States of America Part V. Washington, D.C.
Vanderpol A (1919) La doctrine scolastique du droit de guerre. Pedone, Paris
Villiger ME (1997) Customary international law and treaties. Kluwer, The Hague
Waldock CHM (1952) The regulation of the use of force by individual states in international law. Recueil Des Cours 81(1952-II):451–517
Waldock CHM (1962) General course on public international law. Recueil des Cours 106:1–251
Walzer M (2006) Just and unjust wars. Basic Books, New York
Webster 1841: Letter from Daniel Webster, US Secretary of State, to Henry Fox, British Minister in Washington, 24 April 1841, in British and Foreign State Papers, 1840–1841, Vol. 29 (1857). James Ridgway and Sons, London, pp. 1129–1139
Wedgwood R (2003) The fall of Saddam Hussein: Security Council mandates and preemptive self-defense. Am J Int Law 97:576–585
Wolfke K (1993) Custom in present international law. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht
Wright Q (1963) The Cuban quarantine. Am J Int Law 57:546–565
Ziegler KH (1994) Völkerrechtsgeschichte: ein Studienbuch. Beck, Munich
Yoo J (2003) International law and the war in Iraq. Am J Int Law 97:563–576
Zoller E (2004) The law applicable to the preemption doctrine. Am Soc Int Law Proc 98:333–337
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Szabó, K.T. (2011). Introduction. In: Anticipatory Action in Self-Defence. T.M.C. Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-796-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-796-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press
Print ISBN: 978-90-6704-795-1
Online ISBN: 978-90-6704-796-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)