Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Anticipatory Action in Self-Defence pp 101–115Cite as

The Right of Self-Defence and the Drafting of the UN Charter

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1286 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter looks at the relevant discussions leading up to the 1945 San Francisco conference and the negotiations at the conference, in order to discern the importance given to self-defence at the time. The chapter first looks at the correspondence leading up to the conference and the various opinions expressed as to the status and significance of self-defence. Likewise, the initial statements made by various parties at the beginning of the conference are given attention. Further, the negotiations in technical committee 4 concerning Article 51 are elaborated and the main divisions between the parties described. Lastly, Chapter 4draws the conclusions on the interpretation of Article 51, on the basis of its meaning, object and purpose as well as the discernable intention of the parties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Declaration at St. James’ Palace in London, 12 June 1941. The participants were: Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa and the exiled Governments of Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia and General de Gaulle of France.

  2. 2.

    Memorandum of the Under Secretary of State (Stettinius) to the Secretary of State, Washington, 2 October 1944. In foreign Relations of the US 1944, vol. 1, p. 862.

  3. 3.

    Proposal of the French Government, 21 March 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, vol. 3, p. 379.

  4. 4.

    Ibid., p. 387.

  5. 5.

    Suggestions of the Turkish Government concerning the proposals for the maintenance of peace and security agreed at the Four-Power Conference at Dumbarton Oaks, 1 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, vol. 3, p. 483.

  6. 6.

    Minutes of the eighteenth meeting of the US delegation, held at San Francisco, 26 April 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, vol. 1, p. 427.

  7. 7.

    Ibid., pp. 428−429.

  8. 8.

    Ibid., p. 428.

  9. 9.

    Plenary Sess., 1 May 1945: Discussion. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, vol. 1, p. 437.

  10. 10.

    Ibid., p. 453.

  11. 11.

    Bowett 1958, p. 183.

  12. 12.

    Terms of Reference of Committee III/4, Chapter VIII, Section C of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals with Pertinent Excerpts from Comments and Draft Amendments submitted by Delegations, 14 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 773.

  13. 13.

    The Act of Chapultepec was an agreement adopted at Chapultepec Castle (Mexico City) by The Inter-American Conference on the Problems of War and Peace a few weeks before the San Francisco Conference (21 February−8 March 1945). The Chapultepec Conference was attended by all the nations of North and South America except Argentina. The signatories agreed to a policy of mutual defense during Second World War against aggression towards any one of them.

  14. 14.

    Minutes of the Twenty-Ninth Meeting of the US Delegation, Held at San Francisco, Friday, 4 May 1945, In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, p. 592.

  15. 15.

    Paragraph 2 of Chapter XII of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals stated: 'No provision of the Charter should preclude action taken or authorized in relation to enemy states as a result of the present war by the Governments having responsibility for such action.’

  16. 16.

    Terms of Reference of Committee III/4, Chapter VIII, Section C of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals with Pertinent Excerpts from Comments and Draft Amendments submitted by Delegations, 14 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 765.

  17. 17.

    Vandenberg 1952, pp. 187−188.

  18. 18.

    Ibid., p. 188.

  19. 19.

    Interim Report to Committee III/4 on the work of Sub-Committee III/4/A, submitted by the Rapporteur Dr. V. K. Wellington Koo (China), 15 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 837.

  20. 20.

    Vandenberg 1952, pp. 190−191. Among the South American states, Bolivia adopted a fundamentally opposite position. It submitted an amendment on the basis of which paragraph 2 of Section C was to be complemented with the sentence: ‘In no case should such regional systems, arrangements, or agencies be able to adopt measures of sanction, whether economic or military, without the expressed authority of the Security Council.’ Interim Report to committee III/4 on the work of Sub-Committee III/4/A, submitted by the Rapporteur Dr. V. K. Wellington Koo (China). In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 836.

  21. 21.

    Minutes of the Thirty-Seventh Meeting of the US Delegation, held at San Francisco, 12 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, pp. 685−686.

  22. 22.

    Minutes of the Third five-Power Informal Consultation Meeting on Proposed Amendments (Part 1), held at San Francisco, 12 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, p. 692.

  23. 23.

    Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, pp. 691−706.

  24. 24.

    Memorandum by Mr. Robert W. Hartley of the US Delegation of a Conversation held at San Francisco, 12 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, vol. 1, p. 703.

  25. 25.

    Ibid., p. 704.

  26. 26.

    Minutes of Informal Drafting session, by Mr. Robert W. Hartley, 12 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, vol. 1, p. 705.

  27. 27.

    Note on Second Informal Consultative Meeting with Chairmen of Delegations of Certain American Republics, held at San Francisco, 15 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, pp. 730−736.

  28. 28.

    Minutes of the Fourth Five-Power Informal Consultation Meeting on Proposed Amendments, held at San Francisco, 15 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, vol. 1, p. 737. The proposal for a separate provision on regional arrangements in the peaceful settlement of disputes became Art. 33 of the UN Charter.

  29. 29.

    Vandenberg 1952, pp. 192−193.

  30. 30.

    Interim Report to Committee III/4 on the Work of Sub-Committee III/4/A, submitted by the Rapporteur Dr. V.K. Wellington Koo (China). In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 834.

  31. 31.

    Proposal for the Amalgamation of Amendments offered to Chapter VIII, Section C, prepared by the Delegation of the US in Consultation with the Other Sponsoring Governments and France, 21 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 3, p. 635.

  32. 32.

    Vandenberg (1952), p. 198 (emphasis added).

  33. 33.

    Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) states: ‘A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.’

  34. 34.

    See, for instance: Brownlie 1963, p. 275; Jessup 1948, pp. 165−166; Ruys 2010, p. 259. See also supra 1.2.

  35. 35.

    The argument advanced by some authors that “if an armed attack occurs” does not mean that “if and only if, an armed attack occurs” is not the best way to approach the problem. Indeed, in terms of logic “if A, then B” is equivalent with the statement that “if not B, then not A”, which, in casu, purports that the literal meaning of Article 51 does not permit self-defence if there is no armed attack. For the mentioned argument, see McDougal and Feliciano 1961, p. 237.

  36. 36.

    Aust 2007, p. 231. Draft Articles on the Convention of the Law of Treaties with Commentaries 1966, Vol. 2, p. 220.

  37. 37.

    Article 32(a) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties (1969) states: ‘Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of Article 31, or to determine the meaning when the interpretation according to Article 31(a) leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure.’.

  38. 38.

    See also: Ciobanu 1970, pp. 327−330.

  39. 39.

    Report of the Rapporteur of Committee 1 to Commission I, 13 June 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 6, p. 459.

  40. 40.

    Memorandum by Mr. Robert W. Hartley of the US delegation of a conversation held at San Francisco, 12 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, p. 703.

  41. 41.

    Franck 2002, p. 50.

  42. 42.

    Minutes of the Forty-Eighth Meeting (Executive Session) of the US Delegation, held at San Francisco, 20 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, p. 818.

  43. 43.

    Ibid.; Minutes of the Thirty-Eighth Meeting of the US Delegation, held at San Francisco, 14 May 1945. In Foreign Relations of the US 1945, Vol. 1, pp. 707−709.

  44. 44.

    Franck 2002, p. 50. See also Corten 2008, pp. 628−629; Ruys 2010, p. 260. Franck himself regards the restrictive proposal of the US delegates as ‘logically indefensible’. Franck 2002, p. 50.

  45. 45.

    Brownlie 1963, p. 275; Corten 2008, pp. 619−624; Christakis 2005, pp. 208−212; Gray 2004, p. 98; Kunz 1947, pp. 877−878; Ruys 2010, p. 260; Wright 1963, p. 560.

  46. 46.

    The attitude of France was interpreted differently by Olivier Corten, who referred to a statement made by a French delegate at San Francisco who asserted that precluding an armed attack was the function of the Security Council. Corten 2008, pp. 628−629.

  47. 47.

    Suggestions of the Turkish Government concerning the Proposals for the Maintenance of Peace and Security agreed at the Four-Power Conference at Dumbarton Oaks, 1 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 3, p. 483.

  48. 48.

    Terms of reference of Committee III/4, Chapter VIII, Section C of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals with Pertinent Excerpts from Comments and Draft Amendments Submitted by Delegations, 14 May 1945. In UN Charter travaux préparatoires, Vol. 12, p. 773.

  49. 49.

    Canyes 1945, p. 508 (quoting the report submitted to the Governing Board of the Pan-American Union by the Director General, Congress and Conference Series, No. 48).

  50. 50.

    See supra 3.3 and 4.7. Bowett 1958, pp. 188−189.

  51. 51.

    Brownlie 1963, pp. 257−261.

  52. 52.

    Gill 1989, pp. 58−60.

  53. 53.

    Webster 1841, p. 1138.

  54. 54.

    June 23 Note, in Miller 1928, pp. 213−214; Benes and Politis 1924, p. 483; Oppenheim 1905, Vol. 1, pp. 178−179.

  55. 55.

    See supra 4.7 and 5.4.

  56. 56.

    Nussbaum 1947, pp. 1−2. For the ‘international’ characteristic of self-defence as a customary norm in earlier frameworks, see supra 2.5 and 3.3.

References

  • Aust A (2007) Modern treaty law and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Benes E, Politis N (1924) Report on the Protocol submitted to the Fifth Assembly. League Nations Off J (Special Supp No 23) 483

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowett DW (1958) Self-defence in international law. Manchester University Press, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie I (1963) International law and the use of force by states. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Canyes MS (1945) The Inter-American system and the Conference of Chapultepec. Am J Int Law 39:504–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciobanu D (1970) The contribution of the Advisory Committee of Jurists to the drafting of the UN Charter. Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 53:300–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Corten O (2008) Le droit contre la guerre: l’interdiction du recours à̀ la force en droit international contemporain. Pedone, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Draft Articles on the Convention of the Law of Treaties with Commentaries (1966) In: Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Foreign Relations of the US: Diplomatic Papers 1944 (1966) vol 1. US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foreign Relations of the US: Diplomatic Papers 1945 (1967) vol 1.: General US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck T (2002) Recourse to force: state action against threats and armed attacks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gill TD (1989) The second Gulf crisis and the relation between collective security and collective self-defence. Grotiana 10:47–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray C (2004) International law and the use of force. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessup PC (1948) A modern law of nations: an introduction. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz J (1947) Individual and collective self-defence in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. Am J Int Law 41:872–879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougal MS, Feliciano FP (1961) Law and minimum world public order: the legal regulation of international coercion. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller DH (1928) The Peace Pact of Paris: a study of the Briand−Kellogg Treaty. GP Putnam’s Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum A (1947) A concise history of the law of nations. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim L (1905) International law: a treatise, vol 1. Longmans, Green and Co, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruys T (2010) ‘Armed attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter. Evolutions in customary law and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • UN Charter travaux préparatoires: documents of the UN conference on international organization, San Francisco, 1945 (1945−1955), vols 1, 3, 6 and 12. UN Information Organizations, London

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg AH Jr (1952) The private papers of Senator Vandenberg. Houghton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright Q (1963) The Cuban quarantine. Am J Int Law 57:546–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Forum for the Law of Armed Conflict and Peace Operations, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Kinga Tibori Szabó (Researcher)

Authors
  1. Kinga Tibori Szabó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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). The Right of Self-Defence and the Drafting of the UN Charter. In: Anticipatory Action in Self-Defence. T.M.C. Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-796-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation