Advertisement

Aerial Blockades in Historical, Legal, and Practical Perspective

  • Michael N. SchmittEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines aerial blockades, a relatively untested method of warfare. Since sea blockades have long been an element of naval warfare, historical examples of naval blockades are discussed as a means of placing aerial blockades in context. Drawing on the law of naval warfare relevant to blockades, the chapter suggests legal criteria for, and legal limitations on, the maintenance of aerial blockades. It also delves into the practical aspects of mounting such operations. The chapter concludes that aerial blockades are a useful, lawful and practical method of warfare.

Keywords

Supra Note Security Council International Civil Aviation Organization Naval Force Cuban Missile Crisis 
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.

Notes

Abbreviations

ADIZ

Air defense identification zone

AIP

Aeronautical information publication

AWACS

Airborne warning and control system

CAP

Combat air patrol

ELINT

Electronic intelligence

FIR

Flight information regions

ICAO

International civil aviation organization

IFF

Identify friend or foe

IFALPA

International federation of airline pilots associations

NOTAM

Notice to airmen

NOTMAR

Notices to mariners

SIGINT

Signals intelligence

USSR

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

VFR

Visual flight rules

References

  1. Akehurst M (1974–1975) Custom as a source of international law. Brit YB Int L 1Google Scholar
  2. Alford N (1967) Modern economic warfare (56 Naval War College international law studies)Google Scholar
  3. Beeston (1990) Baghdad courts world sympathy on UN move. The Times, September 26, available on NEXISGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowles T (1900) The declaration of Paris, 1856Google Scholar
  5. Briggs H (1983) The doctrine of continuous voyage (1926); Jones, The international law of maritime blockade-a measure of naval economic interdictionGoogle Scholar
  6. Bush G (1972) UN notified of new measures against North Vietnam. 66 Dep’t St Bull 750Google Scholar
  7. Charles G (ed) (1913) 3 Treaties, conventions, international acts. Protocols and agreements between the United States and other powers 268Google Scholar
  8. Cheng (1985) The destruction of KAL Flight KE007, and Article 3 bits of the Chicago convention. In: Storm van’s Gravesande JWE, van der Veen Vonk A (eds) Airworthy: Liber Amicorum honouring Professor Dr IH Ph Dierderiks-Verschoor 49Google Scholar
  9. Christol C, Davis C (1963) Maritime quarantine: the naval interdiction of offensive weapons and associated material to Cuba 1962. 57 Am 1 Int L 525Google Scholar
  10. Clark (1973) Recent evolutionary trends concerning naval interdiction of seaborne commerce as a viable sanctioning device. 27 JAG J 160Google Scholar
  11. Cohen A (1911) The declaration of London 6–9Google Scholar
  12. Colombos C (1967) The international law of the sea 729 (6th edn)Google Scholar
  13. Deak F (ed) (1977) 17 American international law cases 381Google Scholar
  14. Deak F (ed) (1978) 20 American international law cases 466Google Scholar
  15. Donahue (1989) Attacks on foreign civil aircraft trespassing in national airspace. 30 AFLR 49Google Scholar
  16. Fenrick (1986) The exclusion zone device in the law of naval warfare. Can YE Int LGoogle Scholar
  17. Fitzgerald (1984) The use of force against civil aircraft: the aftermath of the KAL 007 incident. Can YB Int L 291Google Scholar
  18. Garner (1915) Some questions of international law in the European war (blockades). 9 Am J Int L 818Google Scholar
  19. Greenspan (1959) The modern law of land warfare 650Google Scholar
  20. Grotius H. (1853) De Jure Belli et Pacis. (trans: Whewell W) 3 Grotius on war and peace 6Google Scholar
  21. Hall J (1921) The law of naval warfare 188Google Scholar
  22. Hayes B (1989) Naval rules of engagement: management tools for crisis (Rand note N-2963-CC), July 1989Google Scholar
  23. Hogan A (1908) Pacific blockadeGoogle Scholar
  24. Hughes (1980) Aerial intrusions by civil airliners and the use of force. 45 J Air L Commerce 595Google Scholar
  25. Hyde C. (1945) International law as chiefly interpreted and applied by the United States, 1917–1919 (2nd edn)Google Scholar
  26. Institute of international law (1882) Principes Appliques par la Cour des Etats-Unis dans l’affaire du Springbok, 14 Revue de Droit International et de Legislation CompareeGoogle Scholar
  27. Jahn (1984) Applying international law to the downing of Korean Air Lines Flight 007 on September 1, 1983. Germ YB Int L 444Google Scholar
  28. Jenkins (1985) The legality of the Iraqi exclusion zone and Iranian reprisals. 8 BC Int Comp L Rev 517Google Scholar
  29. Kissinger Presidential Assistant H (1972) Considerations leading to new decisions on Vietnam. 66 Dep’t St Bull 752Google Scholar
  30. Laird Secretary of Defense M (1972) News Conference, May 10, 1972, 66 Dep’t St Bull 761Google Scholar
  31. Leckow (1988) The Iran–Iraq conflict in the Gulf; the law of war zones 37 Int Comp LQ 629Google Scholar
  32. Lillich R, Moore J (eds) (1980) 62 Naval War College international law studies. Readings in international law from the Naval War College Review 1947–1977Google Scholar
  33. Lissitzyn   (1953) Am J Int L 47:559–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lovitt (1944) The AlIied Blockade. 11 Dep’t St BullGoogle Scholar
  35. Majid (1986) Treaty amendment inspired by Korean plane tragedy: custom clarified or confused. Germ YB Int L 190Google Scholar
  36. Mallison   (1962) Limited naval blockade or quarantine-interdiction: national and collective defense claims valid under international law. Gea Wash L Rev 31:335Google Scholar
  37. Mallison and Mallison (1976) A survey of the international law of naval blockade, US Naval Institute Proceeding, Febraury 1976Google Scholar
  38. McCarthy (1984) Limitations on the right to use force against civil aerial intruders: the destruction of KAL flight 007 in community perspective. 6 NYL Sch J Int Comp L p 177, 197Google Scholar
  39. McDougal M, Feliciano F (1961) Law and minimum world public order 492Google Scholar
  40. McNulty (1980) Blockade: evolution and evaluation. In: Lillich R, Moore J (eds) 2 The use of force, human rights and general international legal issues (62 Naval War College international law studies, readings in international law from the Naval War College review 1947–1977), USA, p 172, 174 Google Scholar
  41. Milde (1984) The Chicago convention after 40 years. 9 Annals 119 Google Scholar
  42. Moore J (1906) A digest of international law, vol 7Google Scholar
  43. Moore JB (1924) International law and some current illusions. MacMillan, NY, pp 206–207Google Scholar
  44. Morgan (1988) The shooting of Korean Airlines Flight 007: responses to unauthorized incursions. In: Reisman W, Willard A (eds) International incidents: the law that counts in world politics 202Google Scholar
  45. Nelson (1972) Contemporary practice of the United States relating to international law. 66 Am J Int L 836Google Scholar
  46. Nixon R (1972) Denying Hanoi the means to continue aggression. 66 Dep’t St Bull 747Google Scholar
  47. O’Connell DP (1975) The influence of law on sea power. Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp 169–180Google Scholar
  48. O’Connell DP (1984) The international law of the sea, vol 2. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 1150-1151 Google Scholar
  49. Oppenheim L (1952) International law: a treatise, vol. 2799, 7th edn, Lauterpacht H (ed), p 813 Google Scholar
  50. Phelps (1985) Aerial intrusions by civil and military aircraft in time of peace. 107 Mil L Rev 255Google Scholar
  51. Piggot F (1919) The declaration of Paris 1856Google Scholar
  52. Poulantzas N (1969) The right of hot pursuit in international law pp 271–345Google Scholar
  53. Powers (1958) Blockade: for winning without killing. US Naval Institute Proceedings, August 1958Google Scholar
  54. Richard   (1984) KAL 007: The legal fallout. Annals 10:147Google Scholar
  55. Ritchie H. (1938) The “navicert” system during the world war, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  56. Russo (1988) Neutrality at sea in transition: state practice in the Gulf war as emerging international customary law. 19 Ocean Dev Int L 381Google Scholar
  57. Savage C (ed) (1934) 1 Policy of the United States toward commerce in war 415Google Scholar
  58. Smith (1936) Aircraft and commerce in war. Brit Y B Inc L 37Google Scholar
  59. Spaight J M (1947) Air power and war rights 396, 3rd edn. Longmans, LondonGoogle Scholar
  60. Swayze   (1977) Traditional principles of blockade in modern practice: United States mining of internal and territorial waters of North Vietnam. JAG J 29:143Google Scholar
  61. The Harvard research (1939) Draft convention on rights and duties of neutral states in naval and aerial warfare 33 (Supp.) A J I L 167Google Scholar
  62. The Random House Dictionary (1987) (unabridged) 1777 (22nd edn)Google Scholar
  63. Thomas (1980) Pacific blockade: a lost opportunity for the 1930s. In: Lillich R, Moore J (eds) 62 Naval War College International Law Studies, Readings in International Law from the Naval War College Review 1947–1977, USAGoogle Scholar
  64. Tucker R (1955) The law of war and neutrality at sea, 50 Naval War College International Law Studies, USAGoogle Scholar
  65. Wright (1963) The Cuban quarantine. Am J Int L 57:546CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.United States Naval War CollegeNewportUSA

Personalised recommendations