When one state wages an aggressive war against

  • No School
  • AA 1
  • jjamisu
  • 20

This preview shows page 7 - 9 out of 20 pages.

the UN Charter, to use force in self-defense. When one state wages an aggressive war against another, it is easy to see how a large-scale use of force could be war- ranted as a response and how the jus ad bellum criteria could govern this decision. However, the evolving notion of threat illustrates the need for a more calibrated view of force. In cases of threat associated with terrorism, humanitarian cata- strophe, and the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction, the potential for signi fi cant human rights violations warrants some kind of response, but not necessarily the declaration of a full-scale international war. According to recent research by the Council on Foreign Relations, between  and June of  the United States carried out thirty-six discrete military operations, which they de fi ne as a single or serial physical use of kinetic military force to achieve a de fi ned military and political goal by in icting casualties or causing destruction, without seeking to conquer an opposing army or to capture or control territory.  Considering additional uses of force complicates matters more. No- y zones which utilize air power in support of peace operations by denying the enemy use of designated air space, and provide a means for monitor- ing ground operations  arguably constitute a lower level of force compared to war, though they still require some level of violence to enforce. No- y zones have been employed three times in the last two decades, namely, in Iraq from  to  , Bosnia and Herzegovina from  to  , and Libya in  . While seemingly less violent than full-scale war, they have signi fi cant costs insofar as they require strong regional support to access local air bases and acquire y-over permission. Moreover, their maintenance requires the implied threat of force, which puts multiple categories of peoples civilians and soldiers at risk. As Coady argues, the Iraq containment zone opened the way for human rights from jus ad bellum to jus ad vim 93 . Downloaded from . IP address: 37.150.76.67, on 03 Feb 2020 at 19:28:41, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
Image of page 7
violations by authorizing approximately  ,  sorties per year between  and  . Coady points to  civilian deaths as well as many Iraqi military deaths and much property destruction that lack adequate documentation.  In addition, despite the  report by the International Law Association on the meaning of armed con ict that argues that terrorist attacks do not amount to just cause for small-scale uses of force,  U. S. government of fi cials continue to operate within a moral gray zone created by the increased in uence of nonstate actors, which, some argue, blurs the relationship between morality, international law, and the use of force.
Image of page 8
Image of page 9

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 20 pages?

  • Fall '19
  • Test, Laws of war, jus ad bellum

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture