The use of force against terrorists

Research output: Contributions to collected editions/worksChapterpeer-review

Authors

Whether states can use force against terrorists based in another country is much discussed. The relevant provisions of the UN Charter do not provide a conclusive answer, but have to be interpreted. The present article suggests that in the course of the last two decades, the Charter regime has been re-adjusted, so as to permit forcible responses to terrorism under more lenient conditions. In order to illustrate developments, it juxtaposes international law as of 1989 to the present state of the law. It argues that the restrictive approach to anti-terrorist force obtaining 20 years ago has come under strain. As Jar as collective responses are concerned, it is no longer disputed that the Security Council could authorize the use of force against terrorists; however, it has so far refrained from doing so. More controversially, the international community during the last two decades has increasingly recognized a right of states to use unilateral force against terrorists. This new practice is justified under an expanded doctrine of self-defence. It can be explained as part of a strong international policy against terrorism and is part of an overall tendency to view exceptions to the ban on force more favourably than 20 years ago. Conversely, it has led to a normative drift affecting key limitations of the traditional doctrine of self-defence, and increases the risk of abuse.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Use of Force in International Law
EditorsNicholas Tsagourias, Tarcisio Gazzini
Number of pages39
Place of PublicationLondon
PublisherTaylor and Francis Ltd.
Publication date28.01.2012
Pages339-377
ISBN (print)9780754629481
ISBN (electronic)9781351539777, 9781315084992
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 28.01.2012
Externally publishedYes

    Research areas

  • Law