Suchergebnisse

Use of force is one of the principles of international law which has been banned by the UN Charter and modern constitutions. However, since the enforcement of the UN Charter, self-defense has become the preferred excuse for states to justify their use of force. But applying self-defense requires some conditions. Immediacy is one of the important conditions of self-defense. Immediacy defined as the time span between armed attacks and reaction to it, is the main discourse. This condition requires self defense immediately after the armed conflict or during a rational time span since its occurance.In this respect, the emerging Karabakh Conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the 1990s is important. After Armenia's armed attacks, Azerbaijan has acted within the scope of legitimate self-defense. But in accordance with UN Security Council cease-fire resolution Azerbaijan has suspended its self-defense actions. However, today, still twenty percent of Azerbaijani territory is still under Armenian occupation. Accordingly, after a long time the validity of Azerbaijan's right to legitimate self-defense is still subject to arguments.In this article, by comparing two different approaches (strict and board interpretation approaches) on the temporal link between the measures of self-defense and the armed attacks (immediacy), the temporal link between the self-defense countermeasures of Azerbaijan and armed attacks by Armenia in Karabakh Conflict will be examined.

Methodology for determining a uniform system of international criminal law defenses -- International criminal law defenses originating from customary international law -- International criminal law defenses originating from comparative criminal law -- The diverging position of criminal law defenses before the ICTY and ICC : contemporary developments -- Individual and institutional command responsibility and the international regulation of armed conflicts -- International criminal law defenses and the international regulation of armed conflicts -- Self-defense by states and individuals in the law of war -- Contemporary and new technical issues of international criminal law defenses -- A new concept of international due process

Yoram Dinstein's influential textbook is an indispensable guide to the legal issues of war and peace, armed attack, self-defence and enforcement measures taken under the aegis of the Security Council. This fifth edition incorporates recent treaties such as the Kampala amendments of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, new case law from the International Court of Justice and other tribunals, and contemporary doctrinal debates. Several new supplementary sections are also included, which take into account recent conflicts around the world, and consideration is given to new resolutions of the Security Council. With many segments having been rewritten to reflect recent State practice, this book remains a wide-ranging and highly readable introduction to the legal issues surrounding war and self-defence.

War, Aggression and Self-Defence is an indispensable guide to international legal issues of war and peace, the crime of aggression, self-defence and its trigger, armed attack, and the different modalities of self-defence, as well as enforcement measures taken under the aegis of a binding decision of the Security Council. This new and fully updated 6th edition focuses on the key issues at the forefront of the contemporary international legal debate, as well as analysing the new armed conflicts in Syria, Ukraine and Georgia, re-examining the Kampala amendments on the crime of aggression and considering the phenomenon of 'robust' mandates of a peacekeeping force. Suitable for graduate and advanced undergraduate students, this market-leading book offers a wide-ranging and highly readable introduction to the legal issues surrounding war and self-defence.

In this Article, Professor Beres discusses certain political tensions in the Middle East and the appropriateness of preemptive military action by Israel. He concludes that the ongoing hostilities and threatening overtures by Israel's enemies could give Israel sufficient basis pursuant to international law to conduct preemptive strikes. Upon reaching this conclusion, Professor Beres considers the level of force Israel should employ in various preemptive or counter retaliation scenarios. While the degree of preemption is debatable, the author believes that the preservation of Israel may require some preemptive action in the near future.