In a new paper by the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, authors examine the actual and potential roles of silence in the identification and the development of international law, with a particular focus on jus ad bellum.
Latest in jus ad bellum
India’s statement raises questions of whether a state has a right to self-defense against a nonstate actor when the latter’s conduct has not been attributed to another state, what qualifies as an “imminent” armed attack, and whether India is endorsing the unable-or-unwilling test.
Wherein Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orleans, sends a formal letter of summons to the English upon the siege of Orleans.
Emory University's Laurie Blank discusses the meaning of the right of a state to use force against terrorist groups and violent extremists, in a forthcoming article in the Israel Yearbook of Human Rights, now posted to SSRN, and in a short column in the Jurist
A "brief" review of Marc Weller, ed., The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law (Oxford UP 2015).
A few days ago, Paul McCleary at Foreign Policy reported on U.S. airstrikes against al Shabaab, undertaken in defense of AMISOM forces. McCleary asked, “Is there a new U.S. airstrike policy in East Africa?” My question is, “Is there a new legal theory supporting U.S. airstrikes against al Shabaab?” The most likely of possible answers: The United States could be acting on behalf of the Somali government, assisting it in its non-international armed conflict with al Shabaab.