Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Self-defense in International Law

  • Chapter
Self-defense in Islamic and International Law

  • 156 Accesses

Abstract

The right to self-defense is a natural right known and recognized since time immemorial. It is available to individuals and, after the emergence of states, to states as sovereign entities. Individual actors have historically reserved the right to use force unilaterally to protect and vindicate legal entitlements (Reisman, 1985). “It is admitted that a just right of self-defence attaches always to nations as well as to individuals, and is equally necessary for the preservation of both” (Webster, 1841). It was a common practice for centuries to use force to settle disputes among individuals, tribes, and later on states. “Men rush to arms for slight causes or no causes at all, and ... when arms have once been taken up there is no longer any respect for law; divine or human” (Grotius, 1625). There are two fundamental limitations, necessity and proportionality, on the use of force under customary law since the classic case of Caroline of 1837 (see Jennings, 1938; Waldock, 1952). In the past century, efforts were made to codify restrictions on the use of force: the 1928 General Treaty for the Renunciation of War (Kellogg-Briand Pact), the 1919 Covenant of the League of Nations, and so on. However, agonized by the horrors of World War II, the international community codified the rules on the peaceful settlement of disputes and the use of force in the form of the Charter of the United Nations.

This chapter is published in a different form, in The Journal of Conflict and Security Law. 2007, Vol. 12(1).

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

Access this chapter

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Baker, M. (1987–88) Terrorism and the inherent right of self-defence (a call to amend Article 51 of the United Nations Charter). Houston Journal of International Law, 10, pp. 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, R. and Arend, C. (1994) Don’t tread on us: International law and forcible state responses to terrorism. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 12, pp. 153–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bothe, M. (2003) Terrorism and the legality of pre-emptive force. European Journal of International Law, 14 (227).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowett, D. (1972) Reprisals involving recourse to armed force. American Journal of International Law, 66, pp. 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie, I. (1961) The use of force in self-defence. British Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 37, pp. 183–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie, I. (1955–56) Collective self-defence under the Charter of the United Nations. British Yearbook of International Law, 32, pp. 130–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byers, M. (2002) Iraq and the “Bush Doctrine” of pre-emptive self-defence. Crimes of war project. Available at: http://www.crimesofwar.org/expert/bush-byers.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassese, A. (2001) Terrorism is also disrupting some crucial categories of international law. European Journal of International Law, 21 (5), pp. 993–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassese, A. (1989) The international community’s “Legal” response to terrorism. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 38, pp. 589–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers Compact Dictionary, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney, J. (2001) The use of force against terrorism and international law. American Journal of International Law, 95, pp. 835–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chayes, A. (1991) The use of force in the Persian Gulf. In Damrosch, L. and Scheffer, D. (eds.). Law and force in the New International Order. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coll, A. (1987) The legal and moral adequacy of military responses to terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 81, pp. 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. (2003) The international law commission’s articles on state responsibility: Introduction, text and commentaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damrosch, L. (2000) Sanctions against perpetrators of terrorism. Houston Journal of International Law, 22, pp. 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, B. (2005) Law versus Terrorism: Can Law Win? European Human Rights Law Review, 1, pp. 11–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinstein, Y. (2003) Self-defence in an age of terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 97, pp. 147–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinstein, Y. (1988) War, aggression and self-defence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farer, T. (2002) Beyond the Charter Frame: Unilateralism or Communism? American Journal of International Law, 96, pp. 359–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, T. (2002) Iraq and the “Bush Doctrine” of pre-emptive self-defence. Crimes of War Project. Available at: shttp://www.crimesofwar.org/expert/bush-franck.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, T. (2001) When, if ever, may states deploy military force without prior Security Council authorisation. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 5, pp. 51–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, T. and Patel, F. (1991) Police action in lieu of war: The old order changeth. American Journal of International Law, 85, pp. 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frowein, F. (1988) The present state of research carried out by the English-speaking section of the Centre for Studies and Research. In Legal Aspects of International Terrorism pp. 55–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • General Assembly (1974) Resolution 3314. April 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • General Treaty for the Renunciation of War (Kellog-Briand) 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glennon, M. (2002) The fog of law: Self-defence, inherence, and incoherence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 25, pp. 539–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glennon, M. (2003) Why the Security Council failed? Foreign Affairs, 82, pp. 16–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, Lord. (2003) Iraq: Resolution 1441 (Secret Memo to the Prime Minster). March 7. Available at: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2005/04/28/legal.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. (2002) The legality of using force against Iraq. Memorandum to the UK Government on October 12, 2002. Available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmfaff/196/2102406.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greig, D. (1991) Self-defence and the Security Council: What does Article 51 require? International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 40, pp. 366–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, E. (2001) Thwarting terrorist acts by attacking the perpetrator or their com-manders as an act of self-defence: Human rights versus the state’s duty to protect itscitizens. Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 15, pp. 195–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotius, H. (1913) De jure belli ac pacis libire tres (Three books on the law of war and peace) (Kelsen, trans) (Original work published 1625).

    Google Scholar 

  • Halberstam, M. (1996) The right to self-defence once the security council takes action. Michigan Journal of International Law, 17, pp. 229–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin, L. (1979) How nations behave. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, R. (1994) Problems and process: International law and how we use it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hole, L. (2004) Anticipatory self-defence under international law. American University International Law Review, 19, pp. 69–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.C.J. (2005) Democratic Republic of Congo v. Uganda. December 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.C.J. (2004) Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory. July 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.C.J. (1986) Nicaragua v. United States of America. June 27.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.C.J. (1949) Albania v. United Kingdom (The Corfu Channel Case). April 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.C.T.Y. (1997) Prosecutor v. Tadic. July 14. Available at: http://www.un.org/icty/tadic/appeal/decision-e/51002.htm.

  • Inter-American Reciprocal Assistance and Solidarity (Act of Chapultepec), 1945. Intoccia, G. (19 87) American bombing of Libya: An international legal analysis. Case W. Res. Journal of International Law, 19, pp. 177–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jinks, D. (2003) Self-defence in an age of terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 97, pp. 144–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, R. (1938) The Caroline and McLeod Cases. American Journal of International Law, 32, pp. 82–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen, H. (1948) Collective security and collective self-defence under the Charter of the United Nations. American Journal of International Law, 42, pp. 783–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knauft, S. (1996) Proposed guidelines for measuring the propriety of armed state responses to terrorist attacks. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 19, pp. 763–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz, J. (1947) Individual and collective self-defence in Article of 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. American Journal of International Law, 41, pp.872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht, H. (1933) The function of law in international community. Oxford:Claredon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • League of Nations (1919) Covenant of the League of Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobel, J. (1999) The use of force to respond to terrorists attack: The bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan. Yale Journal of International Law, 24, pp. 537–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormack, T. (1991) Anticipatory self-defence in the legislative history of the United Nations history. Israel Law Review, 25 (1), pp. 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougal, M. (1963) The Soviet-Cuban quarantine and self-defense. American Journal of International Law, 57, pp. 597–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, S. (2002) Terrorism and the concept of “armed attack” in Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, Harvard International Law Journal, 43, pp. 41–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Boyle, F. (1987) Military responses to terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 81, pp. 287–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, W. (1990) Reprisals, deterrence and self-defence in counterterror operations. Virginia Journal of International Law, 30, pp. 421–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, M. (2002) The myth of preemptive self-defence. ASIL Task Force on Terrorism. pp. 1–22. Available at: http://www.asil.org/taskforce/oconnell.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paust, J. (2004) Post-9/11 overreaction and fallacies regarding war and defence, Guantanamo, the status of persons, treatment, judicial review of detention, and due process in military commissions. Notre Dame Law Review, 79, pp. 1335–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paust, J. (2002) Use of armed force against terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond. Cornell International Law Journal, 35, pp. 533–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, M. (2003) Self-defence in an age of terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 97, pp. 141–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, M. (1991) Allocating competences to use coercion in the post-cold world order: Practices, conditions, and prospects. In Damrosch, F. and Scheffer, D. (eds.) Law and Force in the New International Order. Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, M. (1985) Criteria for the lawful use of force in international law. Yale Journal of International Law, 10, pp. 279–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, G. (1987) Self-help in combating state-sponsored terrorism: self-defense and peacetime reprisal. Case W. Res. Journal of International Law, 19, pp. 243–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, A. P. V. (2001) Terrorism and the law of war: September 11 and its aftermath. Crimes of War Project. Available at: http://www.crimesofwar.org/expert/attack-apv.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostow, E. (1991) Until what? Enforcement action or collective self-defence. American Journal of International Law, 85, pp. 506–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowles, J. (1987) Military responses to terrorism. American Society of International Law Proceedings, 81, pp. 307–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sapiro, M. (2003) Iraq: The shifting sands of pre-emptive self-defence. American Journal of International Law, 97, pp. 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, O. (1991) Authorised uses of force by the United Nations and regional organisations. In Damrosch, F. and Scheffer, D. (eds.) Law and force in the New International Order. Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, O. (1989) The extra territorial use of force against terrorists. Houston Journal of International Law. 11, pp. 309–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, O. (1987) Self-judging self-defence. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 19, pp. 121–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, O. (1986) “In Defence of International Use of Force” University of Chicago Law Review. 53 pp. 113–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, O. (1984) The right of states to use armed force. Michigan Law Review, 82, pp. 1620–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Security Council (2001) Resolution 1373. September 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Security Council (2001) Resolution 1368. September 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sofaer, A. (2003) On the necessity of pre-emption. European Journal of International Law 4 (2): 209–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sofaer, A. (1989) “Terrorism, the law and the national defence.” Military Law Review, 95, pp. 89–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taft and Buchwald (2003) Pre-emption, Iraq and international law. American Journal of International Law, 97, pp. 557–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, G. (1997) State responsibility for acts of de facto agents. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 14, pp. 635–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travalio, G. (2000) Terrorism, international law, and the use of military force. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 18, pp. 145–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1945) The Charter of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States (2006) The national security strategy of the United States of America. Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/nss2006.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States (2002) The national security strategy of the United States of America. Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldock, C. (1952) The regulation of the use of force by individual states in international law. Recueil Des Cours, Vol. II, pp. 451–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, D. (1840–41) Letters from U.S. secretary of State Daniel Webster to British Minister Mr. Fox, 29 British and Foreign Papers, pp. 1129, 1137–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wedgwood, R. (2003) The fall of Saddam Hussein: Security Council mandates and pre-emptive self-defense. American Journal of International Law, 97, pp.576–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedgwood, R. (1999) Responding to terrorism: The strikes against Bin Laden. Yale Journal of International Law, 24, pp.559–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, J. (2004) Using force. The University of Chicago Law Review, 71 (3), pp. 729–97.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Hull, UK

    Niaz A. Shah PhD, MA, LLB (Lecturer in Law)

Authors
  1. Niaz A. Shah PhD, MA, LLB
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2008 Niaz A. Shah

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shah, N.A. (2008). Self-defense in International Law. In: Self-defense in Islamic and International Law. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230611658_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation