From Unity to Polarization

International Law and the Use of Force against Iraq

Bibliographic Data

ID12199536
AuthorsClint Gray (0000-0001-9744-6356, corresponding author)
Year2002
Volume13
Issue1
Pages1-19
Publication date2002-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEuropean Journal of International Law (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0938-5428 • E-ISSN: 1464-3596
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/ejil/13.1.1
OpenAlexW2001023801
LanguageEN
Citations received12

The impact of the use of force against Iraq over the last 10 years on the development of international law involves consideration of the express authorization of force by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and the limits to be imposed on such authorization; the possibility of implied authorization of force by the Security Council; and the scope of self-defence as a justification for the use of force in the no-fly zones and in response to terrorism. Operation Desert Storm represented the start of a new era for the United Nations: it has become the norm for the Security Council to turn to Member States to take enforcement action under Chapter VII in a wide variety of situations. In contrast, subsequent US and UK actions against Iraq to enforce the no-fly zones have brought deep divisions among states. The USA and UK have become increasingly isolated in their insistence that implied authorization by the Security Council, material breach by Iraq of the ceasefire regime and, for the UK, humanitarian intervention justify their use of force. The same combination of arguments was used regarding the NATO action in Kosovo and raised dramatically the question of how far the actions against Iraq could operate as a precedent

International law · Polarization (electrochemistry · Political science · Use of force · Chemistry · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Military and Defense Studies · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub