Volume 11, Issue 4 (2007)                   CLR 2007, 11(4): 25-50 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Military Operation against Afghanistan from the Perspective of International Law. CLR 2007; 11 (4) :25-50
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-10629-en.html
Abstract:   (6365 Views)
The use of force by the United States of America (USA) and its coalition in Afghanistan, following terroristic attacks of September 11, 2001, can be approached from different political, economic, cultural, humanitarian and human rights dimensions. The right of self-defense is an inherent right of every country that was exercised in accordance with the customary international law before the United Nations (UN) Charter (including Article 51) came into force. Therefore, the concept of this right in the customary international law is wider than in treaty law. It seems that the traditional conditions for a legitimate and permissible defense, as defined under Article 51, cannot provide sufficient answer to the modern questions in the filed. Self-defense, as provided in Article 51, does not include military operation in response to terroristic attacks, if the response breaches the territorial integrity of a country, it bears no direct responsibility for those attacks. Taking into account the new developments in the international community, any interpretation of this principle must inevitably take into consideration the security issues of the world. However, the main purpose of this paper is to examine the subject from the perspective of contractual international law to prove that the military operation going on in Afghanistan since October 7, 2001, can not be justified as self-defense under Article 51. Any interpretation of this Article has to take the provisions of Article 2(4) and 42 of the Charter into consideration. Accordingly, it is clear that for the protection of the international community’s interests, Article 51 imposes certain limitations on the exercise of the right of self-defense. The silence on the part of some states concerning the US operation is not an approval by the international law either. Finally, the inaction by the Security Council of the UN toward both the brutal terroristic attacks against the USA and the latter’s use of force against Afghanistan has undermined the main role of the UN in the international community
     

Received: 1901/12/14 | Accepted: 1901/12/14 | Published: 2007/12/22

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.