8) The prohibition on the use of force and its exceptions and controversies

Question 1

Question: What is the prohibition on the use of force, and where is it codified?
(Hint: Think about Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.)

Answer 1

Answer:

The prohibition, codified in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, mandates that states must refrain from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of other states.

Connection: It forms the cornerstone of jus ad bellum and customary international law.

Question 2

Question: What are the key ambiguities in the prohibition on the use of force?
(Hint: Consider non-state actors and interventions to protect nationals.)

Answer 2

Answer:

The prohibition primarily addresses state actions, leaving ambiguities about responses to non-state actors like terrorist groups.
Some states argue that interventions to protect nationals abroad may not violate Article 2(4).

Connection: These ambiguities complicate enforcement and interpretation.

Question 3

Question: What does Article 51 of the UN Charter say about self-defense?
(Hint: Think about armed attacks and necessity.)

Answer 3

Answer:

Article 51 affirms the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs, subject to necessity and proportionality.

Connection: This is the most widely recognized exception to the prohibition.

Question 4

Question: What is the difference between narrow and expansive interpretations of self-defense?
(Hint: Consider pre-emption and non-state actors.)

Answer 4

Answer:

Narrow: Confines self-defense to responses against actual armed attacks.
Expansive: Includes pre-emptive strikes and actions against non-state actors.

Connection: These interpretations shape debates on the legality of self-defense claims.

Question 5

Question: What is the “unwilling or unable” doctrine in self-defense?
(Hint: Non-state actors in another state’s territory.)

Answer 5

Answer:

The doctrine allows a state to use force within another state’s territory against non-state actors if the host state is unwilling or unable to prevent the threat.

Connection: It remains controversial, as critics argue it undermines sovereignty and lacks a clear legal basis.

Question 6

UN Security Council Authorization

Question: When can the UN Security Council authorize the use of force?
(Hint: Think about Chapter VII and Article 39.)

Answer 6

Answer:

The Security Council can authorize force under Article 39 to address threats to peace, breaches of peace, or acts of aggression.

Connection: Collective security hinges on the Council’s decision-making, often hindered by P5 vetoes.

Question 7

Question: What is the controversy surrounding humanitarian intervention?
(Hint: Kosovo intervention by NATO.)

Answer 7

Answer:

Humanitarian intervention involves using force to prevent atrocities without Security Council authorization. Critics argue it lacks a legal basis under the UN Charter.

Connection: Divides states over the tension between sovereignty and human rights.

Question 8

Question: How does R2P differ from traditional humanitarian intervention?
(Hint: Collective action under the UN.)

Answer 8

Answer:

R2P emphasizes collective action through the UN to protect populations from atrocities. It was adopted in 2005 to address gaps in humanitarian intervention frameworks.

Connection: Its inconsistent application undermines its credibility.

Question 9

Question: What is the crime of aggression under the Rome Statute?
(Hint: Think about leadership crimes.)

Answer 9

The crime of aggression involves leaders planning and executing manifestly illegal uses of force. Jurisdiction excludes non-party states like the US and China.

Connection: This limitation weakens its universal applicability.

Question 10

Question: Why is selective enforcement a major criticism of the prohibition on force?
(Hint: Consider geopolitical interests.)

Answer 10

Answer:

Powerful states often justify uses of force based on their interests, as seen in Russia’s self-defense claims in Ukraine.

Connection: Undermines the credibility and universality of the prohibition.

Question 11

Question: What is the tension between legitimacy and legality in the use of force?
(Hint: Illegal but legitimate interventions.)

Answer 11

Answer:

Some interventions, such as NATO’s Kosovo campaign, are deemed "illegal but legitimate," raising concerns about subjective standards overriding legal norms.

Connection: Risks eroding the rule of law.

Question 12

Question: How do frequent violations challenge the prohibition on force?
(Hint: Michael Glennon’s critique.)

Answer 12

Answer:

Frequent violations, such as pre-emptive strikes and unilateral interventions, suggest that the prohibition is increasingly disregarded.

Connection: Reflects the strain on jus ad bellum in addressing modern threats.

Question 13

Question: How could Security Council reforms strengthen the prohibition on force?
(Hint: Limiting the veto.)

Answer 13

Answer:

Proposals include limiting the P5’s veto in cases of mass atrocities to prevent gridlock and enhance collective action.

Connection: Reforms are essential for improving the Council’s effectiveness.