▼ ❑ I HOW INTERNATIONAL LAW IS MADE ▼ ❑ A SOURCES: ▼❑ 1 United Nations General Assembly • ❑ a Passes "treaties"--NOT BINDING, on 'non-signatories

' ▼❑ 2 International Court of Justice: ▼ ❑ a Only handles disputes b/w nation states who have agreed to
jurisdiction. ▼ ❑ If a nation state has not agreed to jurisdiction by the ICJ, then they have no obligation to appear and cannot be compelled to do so. • ❑ Compulsory Jurisdiction: ART. 36, Section 2 of the ICJ's Statute----this says that if there is a dispute against you, then you (the state) will show up. ▼ ❑ b Not much value on precedence ▼ ❑ 1. each decision is only applicable to the individualized case to which it applies. • ❑ Exception: International Criminal Tribunals DO uphold precedent. ▼ ❑ 2. Is hesitant to issue an order that has a high probability of being ignored because a) they have no means of enforcing compliance and b) each time this occurs, they risk losing credibility in the international community. • ❑ Reason for seemingly inconsistent rulings or ICJ's hesitancy in taking a stand one way or the other. ▼❑ c No coherent reporting system: • ❑ no means of getting information out to the community in a rapid or reliable manner. ▼ ❑ d Making out a prima facia case: • ❑ only requires that one party puts in a claim which the other party denies. A DISPUTE. ▼❑ 3 United Nations Security Council: • ❑ a A council that can use military power to enforce peace and security around the world • ❑ b Resolutions are binding • ❑ c Authority derived from Chapter 7 of UN Charter ▼ ❑ d Five Permanent members (all have veto power) • ❑ 1. US, Russia, China, France, UK (seat is filled by 10 rotating members that rotate throughout the general assembly. Position is not eligible for immediate re-election. ▼ ❑ 2. Only takes one veto to not pass a resolution • ❑ Currently no means for overruling a veto.

International Criminal Court: Created by the Rome Statute that bound signatories to its jurisdiction. • ❑ b Clinton signed this and Bush took us off. (however there are rumors that Bush, prior to leaving office told bush not to ratify it.) ▼ ❑ B INTERNATIONAL CORPUS OF LAW ▼❑ 1 Where do you look to? In which Order? ▼ ❑ a TREATIES ▼ ❑ --UN Charter = father of all treaties • ❑ MAKING TREATIES: • ❑ 1. Many Years of continued state practice--> UN decides that this State is ready to "concretize" their custom. ▼❑ 2. UN votes for a treaty to be written • ❑ --basically a present snapshot of the legal practice/customs w/in that state at the time. • ❑ --treaty does not change the custom--just concretizes it. • ❑ 3. Should the people not obey the treaty, the treaty is reformed and the cycle continues • ❑ CUSTOMARY LAW IS EVERY-CHANGING AND TREATIES THUS ENCOMPASS WHATS ALREADY OCCURRING. ▼❑ TREATIES ONLY BIND SIGNATORIES--However, if you wait long enough--non-signatories will come under customary international law binding. ▼ ❑ Basically, one country will start practicing a certain legal custom and then we wait for the international response. If nobody opposes this practice then it starts to catch and eventually becomes a custom which eventually becomes a treat. IF THERE IS OPPOSITION, WE ADJUST FROM THERE. • ❑ Process for Implementing Treaties: • ❑ 1) UN proposition is sent out to involved states • ❑ 2) Committee is assigned to work on this issue in Geneva (held during the summer) • ❑ 3) A draft is made • ❑ 4) it goes through SEVERAL re-writes, where everyone gets a say • ❑ 5) Countries sign on • ❑ 6) Treaty is taken to the UN "window" to be

▼❑ 4 • ❑ a

ratified. It is NOT Ratified until this last step. • ❑ Rectitude: states like to be seen as obeying the law. • ❑ b CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW: general practice of the states. This is where the majority of International law is found. ▼ ❑ c GENERALIZED PRINCIPALS OF LAW: "pacta sunt servanda"= means "all laws must be obeyed" • ❑ --more like the actual laws of the state (usually looked to when there is a conflict b/w 2 states and nothing in the above 2 categories resolves it.) • ❑ d SCHOLARS/JUDICIAL DECISIONS: last resort-there is no precedence in ICJ decisions ▼ ❑ C SCHOOLS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ▼❑ 1 New Haven School of International Jurisprudence: ▼ ❑ a Suggests 5 goals of Intellectual decision makers: • ❑ --Goal Clarification ▼ ❑ --Trend Analysis • ❑ --analyzing conclusions of similar measures taken to resolve similar issues throughout time. ▼ ❑ --Factor Analysis (factors influencing decisions) • ❑ --recognizing all applicable factors involved: economy, words and deeds, group activities, decision-making institutions, all perspectives involved • ❑ --Predictions • ❑ --Invention of alternatives ▼❑ 2 Positivism: ▼ ❑ a Views International Law from the perspective of the receiver of commands---the "political inferior"--> law = a body of commands • ❑ Domestic US legal system is like this. • ❑ 3 Natural Law Tradition: views the law from the person charged with MAKING the decision. Looks at technical problems that are confronted in terms of making decision that are appropriate to the relevant community. ▼ ❑ II LAW OF BAYS AND THE SEA ▼ ❑ A QUESTIONS FOR DEALING WITH CONFLICTS: • ❑ 1 What's your authority for the action you wish to carry out? • ❑ 2 How do you hold them (the complaining party) ▼❑ 3 What rights are they entitled to based upon: • ❑ a their status

NO STATE MAY INTERFERE WITH ANOTHER STATES FREEDOMS ABSENT A TIME OF WAR AND LEGAL JUSTIFICATION • ❑ Flags: Nationality of Ships • ❑ 1) each state will affix their own requirements for the registration of ships in its territory • ❑ 2) every state will issue accompanying documents verifying the right to fly flag to those ships who have been granted that right. interfering.where you found them what they were doing at the time. inspecting etc. establishing guidelines for business. ▼ ❑ B PIRATE SHIPS ▼❑ 1 Jurisdiction • ❑ a Who owns the machinary/equipment--contractual issue ▼ ❑ b Who gets to prosecute--jurisdictional • ❑ the aim is to "attach" these pirate ships to incidents in other countries and then attach jurisdiction to the country that has been wronged the most by that pirate ship. ▼ ❑ c UN CONVENTION ON LAW OF THE SEA-(1982) • ❑ Freedom of High Seas • ❑ 1) navigation • ❑ 2) overflight • ❑ 3) lay submarine cables/pipes • ❑ 4) fishing • ❑ 5) scientific research • ❑ **These freedoms shall be exercised with DUE REGARD for the interests of other States to exercise these same freedoms. the environment.) ▼ ❑ C INTERNATIONAL WATERS: aka High Seas ▼❑ 1 LAWS • ❑ a Law of the Sea Treaties: defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the worlds oceans. ▼❑ 2 Enemies of the State: • ❑ a pirates are universally subject to the extreme rights of war (for inquiring. • ❑ 3) each ship is subject to only ONE exclusive jurisdiction based on the flag it flies (save in exceptional cases--international treaties) • ❑ b • ❑ c . and the management of marine natural resources • ❑ b Relevant UN Resolutions: where you go if the resolution to the conflict cannot be found in the Law of the Seas Treaties.

remedy the situations • ❑ 2) cause an inquiry to be held by or before a suitable person or board of persons w/r/t every marine casualty or incident of navigation involving a ship flying their flag and causing loss of life or serious injury to nationals of other states. territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal state • ❑ 2) exercise or practice with weapons of any kind . • ❑ Military Interdiction Operations: are naval conducted operations that aim to delay. • ❑ 2) State owned/operated ships used only for noncommercial. • ❑ 1 Limits: 12 miles from the baseline=breadth ▼❑ 2 Right of Innocent Passage: ships of all states enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea. good order or security of the coastal state. ▼ ❑ D TERRITORIAL WATERS: governed by the host state but subject to certain servitudes for the benefit of international users. disrupt. ▼ ❑ a Passage =navigation for the purpose of • ❑ 1) traversing that sea w/o entering internal waters • ❑ 2) proceeding to or from internal waters ▼ ❑ b Meaning of "innocent passage": not prejudicial to peace. Passage is NOT innocent if a foreign ship engages in the following activities: • ❑ 1) threat of or use of force against the sovereignty. governmental services shall have complete immunity from any jurisdiction save the flag state. • ❑ Where "High Seas" Begins: • ❑ 1) 200 miles from the baseline of a coastal state is assigned to that state for exclusive economic zones. or destroy enemy forces or supplies en route to the battle area before they do any harm against friendly forces. • ❑ Immunity • ❑ 1) Warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any other State. save their flag state.• ❑ 4) A ship may not change its flag during a voyage or while in port--save in the case of a real transfer of ownership • ❑ Duties of Flag State • ❑ 1) investigate reports of justifiable grounds for a belief of proper jurisdiction violation involving a ship with their flag--and if need be.

▼ ❑ E CONTIGUOUS ZONES: control of areas next to territorial waters for specific purposes • ❑ 1 Preventing Infringement of Laws. landing or taking on board of any aircraft • ❑ 6) launching. if essential for the protection of security provided that such suspension will only take affect after having been PUBLISHED. ▼❑ 3 Bays: well-marked indentation whose penetration is in such proportion to the width of its mouth as to contain land-locked waters and constitute more than just a "mere curvature" of the coast. regulations and laws of the coastal state • ❑ 8) an act of willful polution • ❑ 9) any fishing activities • ❑ 10) carrying out of research • ❑ 11) any act aimed at interfering with systems of communication of the coastal state. • ❑ 5) launching. • ❑ 2) in the case of internal waters--the right to take necessary steps to prevent a breach of the conditions required for admission of ships into those waters. ▼ ❑ F INTERNAL WATERS-BAYS--Art. a baseline shall be drawn across the mouth of the river b/w 2 points on the low-water line of its banks.• ❑ 3)any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of coastal state • ❑ 4) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defense or security of the coastal state. etc. • ❑ 2 Mouths of Rivers: for rivers that flow directly into the sea. . Regulations and Customs • ❑ 2 Punish infringement of the above Laws. ▼ ❑ c Rights of Protection of Coastal State • ❑ 1) take any steps necessary to prevent passage that is not innocent within it's territorial sea. • ❑ 3) Suspending passage of specified areas of territorial seas. 8. • ❑ 3 Contiguous Zone may not extend beyond 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.10 of UN Convention of Law of Sea • ❑ 1 Internal Waters: waters on the landward side of the territorial sea form part of the internal waters of that state.9. landing or taking on board of any military device • ❑ 7) loading or unloading anything contrary to the customs.

by protection against abuses. • ❑ Semi-Circle Test: bay's area is less than that a a semi-circle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of the indention. if ever. to aid in developing a government for the protectorate • ❑ 3. • ❑ 2. to promote constructive measures of development • ❑ 5. social and educational advancement.1 Montevideo Convention ▼❑ 1 A state is a person of International Law that should possess the following: • ❑ a permanent population (stability • ❑ b a defined territory • ❑ c a government • ❑ d a capacity to enter into relations with other states (become a member of the world community) ▼ ❑ B WHO CAN BE A "STATE" • ❑ 1 Nation State ▼❑ 2 Non-Self governing entities • ❑ a Trusteeships • ❑ b Mandates ▼ ❑ c Protectorates ▼ ❑ these are like the adopted children of the "administering states. by following these goals: • ❑ 1. ▼ ❑ c US uses a 24 mile closing rule together with the semi-circle test for classifying bays. with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned. • ❑ b this Article does not apply to Historic Bays. their political.islands within the bay---are considered included as if they were part of the water area of the indentation. who "own" them until they're ready to be sovereign. economic. to further international peace and security • ❑ 4. ▼❑ Administering States: "The parent state" who takes on the responsibility of ushering the non selfgoverning states into self-determination. AND their just treatment. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for • ❑ a . ▼ ❑ III ESTABLISHMENT/TRANFORMATION/TERMINATION OF STATES ▼ ❑ A TRADITIONAL DEFINITION OF A STATE-Art. Ensure.

UN Charter Article 75: discusses international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories.information purposes (on progress etc.) ▼❑ 3 Autonomous sub-units of states ▼ ❑ a Not actually allowed to be a "state" but they are allowed to be autonomous within the country. UN Charter Article 73: Non Self-Governing territories (trusteeships)--territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount. • ❑ --South Ossetia and Abhkaia are both autonomous units within Georgia ▼❑ 4 Regions within a state • ❑ a Bast Region in Spain ▼❑ 5 Administrative Unit • ❑ a Palestinian Authority ▼❑ 6 Indigenous Peoples within Reservations • ❑ a Natives in both the US and Canada ▼ ❑ C RIGHT TO BECOME A STATE--AUTHORITY? • ❑ 1 UN Charter-Article 1(2): To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. within the system of international peace and security established by the present charter. • ❑ Areas of Law Referring to Self-Determination: • ❑ 1. higher conditions of economic and social progress development. IMPORTANT PHRASE: "All armed action or . higher standards of living. Have their own language. and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace ▼❑ 2 Self-Determination: promoting full employment. • ❑ a NOT A SYNONYM FOR INDEPENDENCE ▼ ❑ b IS THERE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO SELFDETERMINATION??--it appears there is one. Declaration on Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (1961)--General Assembly Resolution ▼ ❑ This did away with the colonialism and all of its manifestations. • ❑ 2. etc. • ❑ 3. and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote the utmost.

" • ❑ Does Past aggression by a colonial government count. they gain the right to determine their constitution w/o outside interference. ▼ ❑ D STRATEGIES FOR CHANGING INTERNATIONAL STATUS ▼❑ 1 Military conquest: not recognized by the UN as a legitimate transformation ▼ ❑ a East Timor Case: Dispute b/w Portugal and Australia. offers equal guarantees of fundamental freedoms and rights w/o distinction or discrimination • ❑ 3. • ❑ BOTH FREE ASSOCIATION AND INTEGRATION REQUIRE "FREE AND OPEN CHOICE" • ❑ --The strong word "shall" suggests that ultimately you have a right to self-determination. Basically• ❑ 1. .repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected. Equal Opportunities for representation and effective participation at all levels in the executive. legislative and judicial organs of government. offers equal rights of citizenship • ❑ 2. SO LONG AS it does NOT DISRUPT the national unity and territorial integrity of the country within which this right is asserted. They become exactly part of the unity state with all the same protections and rights and other nationals. DOES NOT PRECLUDE CONSULTATIONS AS APPROPRIATE or necessary under the terms of the free association agreed upon (sort of like "shared sovereignty")---you more or less have sovereignty in your own spheres • ❑ INTEGRATION: this occurs when one country is absorbed or integrated into another. And also by this. in the determination of whether or not a state has a right to secede?? PROBABLY NOT (Scottland Case) ▼ ❑ c Other Ways to Gain Status: From the: Principles Which Should Guide Members In Determining Whether or Not an Obligation Exists to Transmit the Information Called for Under 73(E) of the Charter--General Resolution (1960): (Other ways to gain status) • ❑ FREE ASSOCIATION: gives a people the right to modify the status of their territory through expression of their will by democratic means and through constitutional processes.

THEY were the only ones authorized to make treaties re: the sovereignty of that territory. • ❑ Politics? The president of the court at the time was up for re-election and did not want to rule against a muslim country (indonesia) ▼ ❑ Aftermath: In 1999. So long as the secessionist regime does not disrupt the peace of the international community. They voted to not. where Indonesian troops invaded East Timor.. East Timor=first case of this. Portugal claims that as the administering state of East Timor. Portugal signed an agreement w/ Indonesia which would offered East Timor the choice of remaining apart of Indonesia --as an autonomous entity--or not.Australia recognized "de facto (by fact)" that Indonesia (who militarily invaded the territory) was the administering authority of East Timor and made a treaty with them in order to prevent adverse effect on Australian trade (due the proximity of East Timor to the Timor Gap.but by the time they arrived.---not likely any longer ▼❑ 3 Secession: From the root 'secede' ---to leave or pull away from another country. they . killing thousands of civilians and displacing many more. the damage was done. the Court cannot act because they cannot try a case that could result in affecting the rights of an absent party. ▼ ❑ Indonesia is not present for this dispute. • ❑ Nation Building: UN came into East Timor (or authorizes someone else to) in order to rebuilt a nation that has been destroyed. A group or part of a population deciding that they want to leave the unitary country and for their own country. • ❑ 2 Claims of Discovery: planting the flag--res nullius or terra nullius the notion of a thing or land belongs to no one and was in this condition when you "discovered" it. ▼❑ VERDICT: The court says that self-determination is STILL and absolute right (ergo omnes---applying to all) but even so.. ▼ ❑ a Franck's View: The Right to Unilaterally Secede exists because though International Society does not recognize it they do not explicitly prohibit it. This resulted in a horrible military backlash. ▼❑ UN RESPONSE: Security Council Resolution 1264: authorizing Australia (the go-to guys for disarmament) to go and stop the violence.

▼❑ VERDICT: For this case. When it's achieved by mutual agreement w/ the parent state (i. • ❑ COURT RECOGNIZES 3 EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE: • ❑ 1) Oppressed or Colonial People • ❑ 2) People who are subject to alien subjugation. • ❑ --for this vote to have effect--there would have to be a debate in order to resolve issues of maritime resources. • ❑ 2. When a secessionist regime has demonstrated EFFECTIVE. USSER. as a whole. the ruling Authority is the Canadian Constitution because currently Quebec is still part of Canada.e. When can be satisfied with its pre-existing territories and be willing to live within them. national debt.may leave. boundaries. There is NO RIGHT to UNILATERAL secession in Canada. Serbia/Montenegro. CONTINUOUS control over its territory AND the secessionist government has indicated its ACCEPTANCE of RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS • ❑ 3. etc. The court states that even a democratic vote shows a strong majority in favor of secession. because they cannot on their own accord. When it has taken constitutional steps to ensure political autonomy for such of its own minorities that desire it. ▼ ❑ Quebec Secession Case: Quebec wishes to secede from Canada and validates their right by showing the results of a vote in Quebec that are in favor of secession. ▼ ❑ b External Secession: Right to Unilateral Secession: NO. (government commits acts of violence on its own people) . this would have NO EFFECT. domination or exploitation outside of the colonial context. EXCEPT FOR 3 SITUATIONS. He lists 5 situations of when unilateral secession is recognized: • ❑ 1. push aside the principles of federalism and the rule of law in Canada. Czech Republic/Slovakia. • ❑ 5. When a secessionist government can demonstrate its democratic legitimacy • ❑ 4.

and developed the Kosovo Liberation Army as a last resort. ▼❑ ---seems to suggest that more consideration will be given to state that are behaving within the lines of International Law (good-guy states) • ❑ Difference between Chechnya and Kosovo: Chechnya never negotiated and seceded de facto. as a last resort to exercise it by secession. internally.▼ ❑ 3) When a people is blocked from the meaningful exercise of its right to self-determination. • ❑ INTERNATIONAL LAW PROVIDES NO RIGHT TO UNILATERAL SECESSION UNLESS: • ❑ 1) You are internally blocked from exercising your selfdetermination within the confines of the parent state. that this does not make the practice acceptable by International Law standards. is somehow being TOTALLY frustrated. ▼ ❑ c Internal Secession: by process of its political. • ❑ --none apply to Quebec. Kosovars continued to seek peaceful means of accomodation. did not represent the popular will of the people. KOSOVO obtained autonomy to a degree after the break up of the SFRY. There is a duty to recognize the rights of states self-determination and right to secede BUT IT MUST BE BALANCED with the fundamental INTEGRITY OF SOVEREIGN STATES. • ❑ 2) Effectivity Principle • ❑ 3) Government is committing acts of violence on its own people ▼ ❑ ***ULTIMATELY. Chechnya failed to build any viable institutions of an independent state. INTERNALLY. ▼❑ External secession is allowed when the people's ability to exercise their rights to selfdetermination. social and cultural development within the legal framework of an existing state. economic. the Court states. inflicted huge draconian acts of torture and death on Kosovars. • ❑ Effectivity Principle: Where you have a secession "in the streets" and thus it is recognized.)---***Kosovo gained recognition by . turned to criminal activity. which took over. However. it is entitled. The FRY.

NONE OF WHICH. Slovenia • ❑ 2. Basically obtaining the country by an agreement between the leaders of the accepting country and the giving country. • ❑ 1. Spain claims that at the time it colonized this area it was Terra Nullis: ---Morocco claims it was NOT terra nullius because there were historical ties to this area and Morocco which made Morocco the "administering state" at the time Spain colonized the area.the International Community and Chechnya did not. hold a UN seat. ▼❑ 4 Succession: refers to what happens to a name or a part of a country after secession has taken place (has much to do w/ who keeps the flag and who keeps the UN seat)--Who was/is the successor state? ▼ ❑ a Break up of Yugoslovia: resulted in 4 break-away republics. • ❑ VERDICT: Spain's claim wins b/c it was able to prove that it acquired this territory under cession . • ❑ 2) a demonstration that the persons comprised in the group asserting the claim to self-determination represent the will of the majority of that group. Croatia • ❑ 4. Under Foreign Occupation • ❑ 5. • ❑ 4. Colonial Context---not really an issue any more. including efforts to use the good offices of other states and intergovernmental organizations. • ❑ 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR A CLAIM UPON A TERRITORY BASED ON CONTINUED DISPLAY OF AUTHORITY • ❑ a) Intention and will to act sovereign ▼ ❑ b) Some actual display or exercise of such authority. Bosnia Herzogovina • ❑ 3. ▼ ❑ a Western Sahara Case: Dispute between Spain and Morocco over the Western Saraha. Macedonia ▼❑ 5 Cession: comes from the root "cede" to sell or to give away. • ❑ 3)a resort to the use of force as a last resort. • ❑ Charney Article: Which Claims for selfdetermination are valid? • ❑ ---A valid claim will show the following: • ❑ 1) Bona fide exhaustion of peaceful methods of resolving dispute b/w the government and the minority group claiming an unjust denial of self-determination.

stay as they are. process by which the line was drawn should merit consideration (i. ▼ ❑ E DESOLUTION OF OLD STATE ▼❑ 1 Usi Possedetis: all boundaries currently in place after the dissolution of a nation state.) • ❑ 4) consult with the populace of a disputed territory on its future. Spill over effect: a) tempts ethnic separatists to divide the world further along administrative lines b) leaves significant populations both unsatisfied with their status in the new states and uncertain of political participation there---may lead to "ethnic cleansing" • ❑ Ratner's Guidelines for drawing Territorial Boundaries post-secession: • ❑ 1) Start with Uti Possidetis • ❑ 2) Open Negotiations ▼❑ 3) Make changes peacefully • ❑ a. economic/geographic considerations of entities that would emerge • ❑ b.e. This occurred whenever there was changeover in "councils" --froze borders to prevent conflict. BosniaHerzegovina and Macedonia (also 2 autonomous provinces= Kosovo and Voyvodina) • ❑ --1980 Tito dies • ❑ --The Former Republic of Yugoslavia is formed to replace SFRY--the intended to govern themselves by power-showing . Croatia. ▼ ❑ 1. Age lines and population that have adjusted to long-standing borders • ❑ c. a constitutionally authorized line should have a greater presumption of permanence than one determined solely at the command of a dictator. ▼ ❑ b Yugoslavia: After WWII. into "states" • ❑ --Tito forms the Social Federal Republic of Yugoslavia: consisted of Serbia. several republics of Yugoslavia were group together w/o consideration for the inner conflicts amongst them. Slovenia. Montenegro. ▼ ❑ a Problems proposed by Steven Ratner: Usi Possidetis should only apply at the beginning of a new state and until appropriate authorities decide on their new borders.through the indigenous tribes AND it as able to offer evidence to prove the 2 above elements.--General Principle according to the ICJ--and does not conflict w/ self-determination.

▼ ❑ F DECLARATION OF STATEHOOD + RECOGNITION ▼❑ 1 Who Recognizes? ▼ ❑ a United Nations--by offering State Membership • ❑ member state duties: • ❑ 1) a duty to recognize states that meet the requirements • ❑ 2) a duty to NOT recognize state that dont ▼ ❑ 3) a duty to not prematurely recognize state that haven't . • ❑ problem for Kosovo--who had no borders. All disputes over succession had to be settled peacefully. • ❑ 5. Clinton orders a NATO air strike on Sarajevo ▼❑ EU Reaction: Established a list of criteria for recognition of a state: • ❑ 1) sign on to respect the UN charter • ❑ 2) sign on to respect the Helsenki Accords and a number of other UN security instruments. Must sign on to the nuclear commitments that were in place • ❑ 6. other Republics declared independence (Croatia. what can we do? ▼ ❑ While waiting for UN response after Security Council declared that they would intervene. • ❑ 3) Must promise that ethnic minorities must be guaranteed human rights. Macedonia. • ❑ UN Deliberates Response: • ❑ 1) Do we want to encourage secession out of the colonial context? • ❑ 2)When can international borders be changed into smaller ones? ▼❑ 3) If we decided to intervene. ▼ ❑ 4) Must agree to the inviolability of the frontiers: Usi Possedetis. Slovenia and Boznia-Herzegovina) • ❑ --Serbs in Croatia and Serbia then engaged in VICIOUS ethnic cleansing of Kosovars ▼ ❑ --The Security Council instated an "arms" emargo--Serbia did not conform.via a "rotating presidency". who refused to give up his seat at the end of the rotation. (Slobodon from Serbia/Montenegro) • ❑ --In Resonse. 1st rotation=Slobodan Milosevic.

▼ ❑ G EXTERNAL ELITES ROLE ▼❑ 1 Recognition of Government's in Exile: ▼ ❑ a Reismen: "this is a useful tool for continuing to recognize a legitimate government and ignore the usurper. South Africa • ❑ ---Every State has a right to not recognize another state IF the recognition is based on an inquiry into the sovereignty of the government. Latvia. • ❑ a US called for a regime change in Liberia and Zimbabwe • ❑ b US called for a regime change in North Korea • ❑ c US called for a regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq • ❑ d Reagan saved Granada by regime change • ❑ e Clinton performed a regime change in Haiti ▼❑ f WWII was a HUGE regime change • ❑ Regime change has met with NO OPPOSITION if the intervention was justified. • ❑ i. • ❑ c European Union--regional governmental organization. which has done more to tame conflicts in this area. • ❑ d Nation States in the World: decide when and under what terms that they will recognized a country.e. Has strict requirements for membership. ▼❑ 2 Claim of Regime Change by a 3rd State: basically making the claim that the government in power is committing huge crimes against humanity or something else in order to provoke the International Community to step in and change the Regime. ▼❑ 3 De Jure Recognition: recognizing by established law • ❑ a more formal • ❑ b creates increased prestige and stability at home • ❑ c provides access to private governmental loans b/c of ability to pledge the state's credit • ❑ d diplomatic and consular status is grated for its agents in the recognizing entity • ❑ e access to foreign courts and diplomatic immunity from foreign process • ❑f normal trade relations . Lithuania.quite met the requirements • ❑ ---recognition can be withdrawn--i. US recognized the Baltic States: Estonia. • ❑ b World Trade Organization-governmental organization that can offer claims of legitimacy through recognition.e. Free French Government and Polish Government which were both operated from their exile in London.

Rafael Correa. which authorized the issue of 15 million colones currency notes.1919 (Tinocos regime). supplies or military aid. in any way. which was not obtained. ▼ ❑ --Costa Rica claims that since Great Britain did not recognize them as a state under Tinoco that they are not entitled to call upon a debt from it.capacity to request assistance from the recognizing government in the form of money. ▼❑ 4 De Facto Recognition: recognizing by facts of circumstances. • ❑ Verdict: The debt must paid off and cannot be nullified. 27. 1917 and September 2. • ❑ Law of Nullities: invalidated 1) all contracts b/w the executive power and private persons made with or without approval of legislative power between Jan. upon the faith of it. and 3) invalidate the legislative decree authorizing the circulation of notes of the nomination of 1000 colones and annulled all • ❑ g . 2) Nullified the legislative decree of the Tinoco government. ▼❑ TINOCO Case (Great Britain v. has threatened to not repay that debt incurred by the dictator. the concessions for oil could be nullified not because of the new government's claim of constitutional violations but on Tinoco's constitutional violations---in that the constitution Tinoco was acting under required legislative approval for all concessions. • ❑ --Great Britain is acting on behalf of it's citizens who owned the Petroleum companies involved. ▼ ❑ a enter into trade relations (EXTERNAL ELITES) ▼ ❑ How Long does a government have to be in place before outsiders can do business there or recognize the new state? Not Long. Tinoco. who ousted him illegally and conducted a petroluem business deal entitling the Canadian company to explore and exploit oil deposits in Canada.--Taft says that Great Britain's non-recognition did not effect the succeeding government in any position. • ❑ --Costa Rico denies liability for the acts or obligations of the Tinoco regime on the basis that the Tinoco government was not a recognized one and thus the Law of Nullities should apply. However. Costa Rica): The president of Ecaudor.

. after approval. business relations etc. ▼❑ Underlying Principle: Continuity of States--what ever government has effective control of the state is legitimate and can enter into contracts.. THE RESTORED GOVERNMENT IS GENERALLY LIABLE FOR THE ACTS OF THE USURPER ▼ ❑ Factors Taft Reviewed in Making This Decision: • ❑ 1) Tinoco seized government • ❑ 2) Immediately instated a new government • ❑ 3) held elections to the assembly • ❑ 4) Presidential election was held • ❑ 5) New constitution was adopted • ❑ 6) Regime existed for 2 years • ❑ 7) No other governmental sect existed (in exile or otherwise) ▼❑ 8) The people accepted it. • ❑ TODAY's RULE: The Continuity of principle would be applied to similar situations as the one that arose in Ecuador. Government's come and go. • ❑ TEST: has the government in power engaged in actual and peaceful negotiations with the complaining party? If so--Law of Nullities does not apply..states do not. the state is bound by those engagements even though that government has ceased to exist. Therefore. • ❑ b enter into treaties ▼❑ 5 UN seat (even if obtained in a manner not in light w/ International Law (i. unilateral secession not under one of the exceptions) ▼ ❑ a Process of Becoming a State: • ❑ 1. • ❑ What do you do if a country who owes debt cannot repay it?---Bankruptcy--iceland declared such recently.transactions done with this paper. application to General Assembly • ❑ 2.e. application must be approved by the Security council • ❑ 3.. general assembly votes.

• ❑ --suggests that there SHOULD be assessments in this arena ▼ ❑ B IDEOLOGICAL INSTRUMENT: involving the modulation of carefully selected signs and symbols to politically relevant parts of the rand and files as a means of influencing the elite that governs it. ▼ ❑ C DIPLOMATIC INSTRUMENTS: involving communications ranging from persuasion to coercion. or if the target does not find that the threat is adequate to persuade a change in attitude or behavior. "by the book" inspections. ▼❑ 2 Multi-lateral sanctions: imposted by the UN Security Council Article VII-10 sanctions. REISMAN suggests this is because we have a "blind spot" and see that only military sanctions have physical effects and therefore they are the only ones requiring assessment. dilapidation. carrying perishables being subject to painfully slow. if it's economic as opposed to military. • ❑ Common Target Strategy: "Wait and See"--the rationality of this strategy depends upon the threat--i. ▼❑ 1 Propaganda and Social influences • ❑ a Damages: ousting from important influential groups.e. arms embargo ▼❑ 3 Measures for Assessing Legality? ▼ ❑ a Currently none in place.UN MEMBERSHIP STATE REQUIREMENTS 1 Established government 2 Established territory over which the government resides 3 Showing of some loyalty to that territory 4 Ability to engage in international relations ▼ ❑ IV STRATEGIES OF INFLUENCE: How to encourage countries to follow a "rule" ▼ ❑ A ECONOMIC INSTRUMENTS: involving the granting or withholding of indulgence or deprivations from a target • ❑ 1 Unilateral Sanctions: a ship wanting to pass through a port. directed against the elite of a target ▼❑ 1 Threats: 2 stages • ❑ a Communication Stage: "Do this or else" ▼ ❑ b Application Stage: the "or else" ▼ ❑ This will not work if the target doesn't believe that the sanctioner will follow through or has the capacity to follow through. • ❑ a Damages: starvation. ▼ ❑ D MILITARY INSTRUMENTS: INITIATING FORCEFUL ▼❑ • • • • H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ .

popular culture and songs. Factors considered: • ❑ 1. degree of threat presented • ❑ 2. or in part. national) ▼❑ Requires Proof of such act committed with the INTENT to destroy in order to bring a case of genocide. Genocide: any number of acts committed with the intent to destroy in whole. proportionality of the measure chosen to the necessity of the defending against the threat. • ❑ 4. after the fact. urgency of the unilateral action to prevent or deflect the attack. ▼❑ 2 Rules for Proper Military Sanctions • ❑ a Must be necessary • ❑ b Must be proportional • ❑ c it must be capable of discrimination b/w combatants and non-combatants ▼❑ 3 Analyzing Legality of Action: ▼ ❑ a All military actions taken are measured. along with the trigger for it. who is acting in self-defense is not required to gain approval of the Security council before they act.INTERVENTION ▼❑ 1 Authorities: • ❑ a UN Article 41: Must try other means to resolve conflict and only resort to military intervention as a last resort. Recognized Genocide Groups • ❑ a) ethnical • ❑ b) religious • ❑ c) racial • ❑ d) national • ❑ 2. availability of meaningful organized initial response • ❑ 3. according to these three rules. War Crimes-Crimes against humanity committed during war • ❑ 3. religious. ▼ ❑ b Crimes Against Humanity (humanitarian intervention) ▼ ❑ 1. ethnical. any group (racial. Aggression .) • ❑ 1. But they MUST report this action to the Security council afterwards. newspaper articles. (intent can be inferred from statements by leaders. ▼❑ 4 Basis for Initiating Force: ▼ ❑ a Self Defense • ❑ UN Charter Article 51 : "a member state.

No war is needed. • ❑ Theory?? If you are in command of a certain group and THEY commit war crimes then you are held liable for their actions.▼ ❑ 4. IF YOU FAIL TO PUNISH them for their actions. funded by member states of the Rome Statute. It is also true that you will be held liable for their actions EVEN if you became commander after the crimes had already been committed and you failed to punish them. • ❑ can be committed by either civilians or by the military ▼❑ BOTH ENGAGING IN AND ALSO FAILING TO ERADICATE OR ELIMINATE ONGOING CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY WARRANT LIABILITY • ❑ Nerumbug Trials: established that soldiers can be held liable. individually for crimes against humanity and you can no longer say "I was just following orders" ▼ ❑ --individual commanders can be held liable as well--THEY DO NOT HAVE TO BE INVOLVED IN THE CRIMES OR EVEN KNOW OF THEM. • ❑ State actions w/r/t Genocide. have their own statute--Rome Statute. ▼❑ c) Mixed Tribunals: (has 2 separated processes: 1) the state has authority to hire its . ▼ ❑ CURRENT WAR TRIBUNALS ▼❑ a) Ad Hoc (created by UN after the crime) • ❑ 1) ICTY--first tribunal to declare Rape a war crime 2001 ▼ ❑ 2) ICTR--first tribunal to declare Rape an aspect of genocide • ❑ Gacaca courts (Tanzania. systematic manner with the intent to harm citizens. Arusha) ▼❑ b) Permanent court • ❑ 1) ICC: not a UN court. States MAY: • ❑ 1) prevent it • ❑ 2) stop it ▼❑ 3) try criminals in war tribunals in order to deter it. Other crimes against humanity-crimes against humanity performed in a wide-spread.

▼❑ France and Belgium responded and began to evacuate the area of Europeans and to hold it against further rebel incursions. • ❑ 1) Special Court of Sierra Leone • ❑ 2) Criminal Court of Cambodia ▼ ❑ c Restore Democracy ▼ ❑ HAITI: US intervened to restore President Jean-Betrand Aristide back to power after he had been thrown by a dictator. • ❑ JUSTIFICATION: Zaire requested assistance and gave uncoerced consent for the military intervention. organs of the international community may enter to terminate the outrage. Zaire's president requested military aid from a number of European and African countries. The right to protect ones nationals flow from the right of self-defense.own staff. and 2) never applied for Security Council approval. • ❑ TEST: if the government residing over the state where the violation is occurring either CANNOT or WILL NOT prevent the violation. Zaire's president requested military aid from a number . 3) and they try the crimes together. Israel 1) acted unilaterally. • ❑ UN having been unable to remove the illegitimate regime by diplomacy AND an international embargo. 2) the UN has the authority to hire it's own staff. ▼ ❑ Angola intervention: Katangan rebel troops invaded the Shaba province of ZAIRE and occupied two of the principle towns. authorized the use of force because of the need to Restore Humanity and Stop Human Rights Abuses (and restore democracy). ▼ ❑ e Protect Nationals ▼ ❑ Entebbe-Uganda case 1976: Israeli effort in Uganda where they engaged in military action for the persecution of its nationals aboard a plane and hijacked by terrorists. ▼❑ Verdict: Court said this would normally not be allowed but under the circumstances it was allowed. ▼ ❑ d Foreign Occupation ▼ ❑ Angola intervention: Katangan rebel troops invaded the Shaba province of ZAIRE and occupied two of the principle towns.

" • ❑ --applies pretty much to the military instrument but can be found in other instrument applications • ❑ --doesn't effect the elites b/c they knew of the threat and have already "stocked up" or guarded themselves. • ❑ Example: Pinochet: committed huge genocide crimes in Chile and traveled to London for a back surgery. • ❑ Collateral Damage: destruction of people/objects in the periphery of the target. • ❑ France invaded and justified this action by Humanitarian concerns for its own citizens. ▼❑ f "Some" Violations of International Law--Jus Cogens ▼ ❑ Some violations of the international community are SO against the law intervention is justified. while recuperating. • ❑ a) Piracy • ❑ b) Highjacking ▼❑ c) genocide ▼ ❑ UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION: flows from Jus Cogens crimes. If a perpetrator of these crimes is found in ANY country. they country in which he is found may charge him and try him. • ❑ --accompanied by core military rules such as "you cannot target innocent people. what classified or even open intelligence was available? . Basically these laws are "jus cogens" or understood by EVERYBODY and are NON-DEROGABLE (cannot be broken w/o quick international response.of European and African countries. In London he was arrested. even if it's not the country where the crimes where committed. ▼❑ 5 US Excuses for Not Intervening in the Face of Genocide: • ❑ a Futility: nothing we can do • ❑ b perversity: we would only make it worse • ❑ c Jeopardy: we have own problems to take deal with ▼❑ 6 Important Questions to ask analyzing failure to intervene-Genocide • ❑ a Where there early warning signs of Mass violence?? • ❑ b did anybody take it seriously when it first began? • ❑ c Was there any reason to believe that it was qualitatively different than "routine" killings of a war? • ❑ d Once the violence had begun.

shortly after. --it was on the heels of WWII. place and purpose. they were marked for execution and killed (similar to German/Jewish Ghettos. which was a point when nuclear testing was seen as more vital. Sunni people that lived in the mountains and were wide-spread through. and was not limited because it was seen as a protection of the WHOLE WORLD against the Soviet Union---Testing was considered acceptable so long as it was reasonable in length. what kept us from doing anything about it. And the Soviet was the only opponent (for obvious reasons) However. they begin nuclear testing themselves. Syria and southern Turkey. Iran.) • ❑ --sprouting of news re: mass killings and mass graves ▼ ❑ --systematic rape • ❑ US interpreted this as Iraq defending itself against terrorists. Nobody else was testing yet. parts of Iraq. • ❑f Who inside/outside of the government wanted what? • ❑ g re: jeopardy--what were the perceived costs/benefits of an intervention. • ❑ --Saddam thought the Kurds were a threat to him b/c they supported Iran. AT THIS TIME THERE WAS ZERO AUTHORITY ON NUCLEAR TESTING LEGALITY • ❑ --w/r/t to customary law--US was it. ▼❑ V NUCLEAR WEAPONS ▼ ❑ A HISTORY ▼❑ 1 Marshall Islands Case: the islanders were complaining about US hydrogen bomb tests in their area because it violated the Law of the Seas ▼ ❑ a This case took place in the mid-50's. • ❑ --he had a goal to "stamp out Kurdish life" • ❑ --1st the Kurds where moved to "collection centers" and if they refused to go. • ❑ e . Kurds established a country at that time.Once we knew what was happening. ▼❑ 7 GENOCIDE CASES/VICTIMS ▼ ❑ a KURDS: • ❑ --a non-Arabic. • ❑ --Iraq was emboldened by US inaction • ❑ RESULT: eventually US did help by putting in "NO FLY" zones and they were very effective--for the 12 years they were in place Saddam basically had control over a little nub.

• ❑ The purpose was to disarm state that had nuclear weapons and to eliminate the incentive to produce and test all kinds of weapons. wants to the court to declare that all atmospheric testing is illegal under international law and asks that the court take interim measures while the case is being decided. ▼❑ 3 Australia v. ▼ ❑ b Australia but a second case because of this • ❑ However. and have taken steps to do so as early as next year. ▼ ❑ The court held that if a statement of this nature is made in the public domain and is known to the other affected party then it shows an INTENT TO BE BOUND. 3) they felt that it was necessary to back out in order to maintain credibility in the international community. or in outer space. • ❑ a Interim measures were put in place but France did not abide by them. • ❑ Political Reasons: The court backed out of this case because 1) nobody supported the court in limiting the testing. by this time. ▼ ❑ B LIMITATIONS ▼❑ 1 Treaties ▼ ❑ a Limited Test Ban Treaty (1963)--Banned all nuclear testing in the atmosphere. ---RESULT??? There was no second case because there was no dispute. underwater.Manhattan Project: "secret testing" occurred in Manhattan that resulted in the hydrogen bomb that exploded in Hiroshima. the Foreign French Minister made a statement during a TV interview stated. Trueman (who had no idea that the Manhattan Project existed) offered the hydrogen bomb technology to the rest of world. France case: Australia wants France to stop nuclear testing in the Pacific Ocean. • ❑ > Banned using the bombs or explosions • ❑ >Obligated signatories to be responsible for radio-active debris that went outside of the states' territorial limits and under whose jurisdiction/control such explosion was conducted • ❑ 2 . including nuclear weapons. 2) the court felt that they had put their entire credibility on the line. "we have no reached a stage in our nuclear technology that makes it possible for us to continue our program by underground testing. Subsequently (after Japan surrendered).

But has obtained nuclear weapons anyway from AQ KHAN "the father of the muslim bomb. Under Zadai??? Who knows. PAKISTAN requested the same deal as India got but has received no answer. they do. Non-nuclear signatories agree to not receive or acquire such devices. NOTICE: 90 days. assist. • ❑ Problem??--huge swaths of Pakistan are . nuclear states are agreeing to come in and protect non-nuclear (signatories) states. • ❑ --Signatories: US. in light of the irreparable damage caused by the debris and chemicals. nuclear states are promising to not share nuclear technology with nonnuclear states and in exchange are obligated to come to the aid of these states. • ❑ Non-Signatories Who Have Acquired Nuclear Technology ▼❑ 1) INDIA/PAKISTAN: though pakistan and India are NOT ALLOWED to trade or possess nuclear weapons. RUSSA ▼❑ --non-signatories: France & China ▼ ❑ didn't want to sign because they were not finished testing. REASON TO WITHDRAW: self defense. Also. should it be needed. ▼ ❑ b Treaty on Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (1970): sought to stop the proliferation of nuclear arms and nuclear testing and prevent a wider dissemination of nuclear weapons. • ❑ Under Musharraf. Only the Permanent 5 were allowed to have nuclear weapons and those State agreed to not trade. ▼ ❑ Only the Permanent 5 had nuclear weapons and wanted to keep it that way. INDIA has weapons/technology because Congress (2 months ago) agreed to sell India nuclear technology in exchange for US inspectors being allowed to inspect certain testing facilities (but not certain military facilities) **India has also agreed to bail the US about of this wall street debacle. Khan was viewed as the great equalizer in power against the Western States.• ❑ >offered signatories the chance to withdraw from the treaties. encourage or induce non-nuclear weapon to state to manufacture or otherwise acquire control over such devices. • ❑ Basically under this treaty. UK. ▼ ❑ IN 1995. THE NPT was extended indefinitely.

--We shall see.controlled by the Taliban. • ❑ SCARY??--US did not know that Libya even HAD weapons until they disclosed it. they handed over all their previously unacknowledged nuclear weapons technology in exchange for the removal of UN and unilateral sanctions that US and UK had imposed upon them. • ❑ 3) LIBYA: had a nuclear program.. Korea from the list. • ❑ 4) IRAN: IS a NPT signatory but has cheated a bunch. as well.. 5--DONT TRY IT. disclosures were mad to the US. Russia is helping them with a peaceful technology research project. • ❑ Suggestions Offered since it isn't clear that the NPT is working: • ❑ Albaradi. Korea had breached their promise and had been secretly perusing the development of uranium based nuclear weapons. ▼❑ --have been sanctioned by the Security Council in the past and Russia. Korea says it will stop building uranium based nuclear plants AND allow inspection IF the US takes them of its "Terrorists State List" • ❑ --US has removed N. that N. India and the US have all agreed on sanctions being implemented again for further breaches. 2) take all technology that all of the current states have and . which they received from AQ Qhan. negotiations have been on and off-most recently. N. Korea had promised to • ❑ --N.Korea had promised to abandon its nuclear program and submit to UN/IAEA inspections in exchange for shipments of fuel oil and the building of nuclear plants • ❑ --2002. Head of the IAEA suggests: 1) redo the NPT.---RESPONSE: BUSH CUT THE FUEL SHIPMENTS • ❑ --subsequently. • ❑ NUCLEAR WEAPON LEGALITY TODAY?? IF YOURE NOT PART OF THE PERM. ▼❑ --In 2004. • ❑ 2) NORTH KOREA: this confrontation began in 2002 and stemmed from the dissolution of a negotiated settlement between Korea and the US (which was induced by the last nuclear outbreak on the Korean Peninsula in 1994).

• ❑ Wider view: the clause provides that something which is no explicitly prohibited by a treaty is not ipso facto permitted. • ❑ Restrictive View: customary international law continues to apply after the adoption of a treaty norm. the presence of which is . the offenders remain under the protection of the law of nations ▼ ❑ a Martens Clause establishes an objective means of determining natural law: the dictates of the public conscience. • ❑ a invasion or attack by the armed forces of a state of the territory of another state.put it into a reserve fuel bank under ONE controlling hand. including severance of diplomatic relations or interruption os economic relations or communications. ▼❑ 3 Typically Initiated by Acts of Aggression: UN Article 2 and 3. sea or air against another state or it's fleets. Therefore. • ❑ 2 Article 39: Security council determines what. 3) ensure everyone a never ending supply for peaceful purposes. • ❑ Widest View: conduct in armed conflict is judged according to both treaties and custom/principles of international law ▼ ❑ B FORCE AUTHORIZED BY SECURITY COUNCIL • ❑ 1 Article 41: Security council decides what measures should be taken. if any threat exists to the peace and shall make recommendations accordingly. • ❑ b bombardment by the armed forces • ❑ c blockade of the ports or coasts of a state • ❑ d an attack by the armed forces of a state on the land.international atomic energy agency) ▼ ❑ VI LAWS OF ARMED CONFLICT ▼ ❑ A MARTENS CLAUSE: • ❑ 1 Introduced into the Preample of the 1899 Hague Convention II--Law and Customs of Armed Conflict ▼❑ 2 Content: basically that until a more complete code for the laws of armed conflict has been instated. powerful military states will interpret in more narrowly than not so powerful military states. ▼ ❑ PROBLEMS? --There is no "correct" interpretation of the clause. (IAEA. the High Contracting Parties declare that in cases not included in regulations adopted by them (outside of domestic law). • ❑ e use of armed forces in one state.

• ❑ Court held that US action was not a legal selfdefense action and thus violated the Laws of Armed Conflict since it was not authorized. ▼❑ 4 No Justification for Acts of Aggression: UN Article 5. . • ❑ g the sending by or on behalf of a state of armed bands. ▼ ❑ a proponents claim it's a deterrent factor against larger destruction. • ❑ 5 Acts of Aggression give rise to International Responsibility: UN 5. ▼ ❑ a "state of war"--if you are already in this position than you have reached the article 51 threshold for anticipatory selfdefense (which allows for a state to act in self-defense UNTIL the UN forces get there. groups. economic.1 • ❑ a no consideration whether political. self-defense is justified. • ❑f the action of a state in allowing its territory to be used by another state for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third state. • ❑ a must show an armed attack ▼ ❑ b must how a request for aid by state needing to defend itself.permissible per an agreement of the other state. • ❑ 1981 Israeli attack on nuclear reactor site in Baghdad. ▼❑ 3 Pre-Emptive: no attack is imminent. but said use violates the conditions of that agreement. which carry out acts of armed force against another state of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above. irregulars or mercenaries. ▼❑ 4 Collective: a state engaging in armed conflict for the "selfdefense" of another state.2 • ❑ 6 No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression will be recognized as lawful. A means for "nipping" armed conflict in the bud.3 ▼ ❑ C SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST A STATE ACTOR • ❑ 1 Reactive: response to an armed attack requires no authority by the UN (Article 51) ▼❑ 2 Anticipatory: imminency of an attack must be looming--and if it is. military or otherwise serve as a a justification.--UN 5.) • ❑ Israel 6 day war. Problem?? El Salvador didn't request aid until months after the US had already invaded. ▼ ❑ Iran Contra--US claimed it was supporting the rebel contras from el salvador as collective self-defense against Nicaragua.

shall inform the consular post of the sending state if. ▼❑ --Supreme Court denied the Writ of Habeas Corpus and held that Breard was not disadvantaged because he DID speak English. The jury sentenced him to death. TREATIES: . ▼ ❑ US RESPONSE: apologized to Paraguay and argued that that was the appropriate remedy for a violation of this nature. the competent authorities receiving the request. a national of that state is arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is detained in any matter. Paraguay filed a claim in the ICJ against the US for violating the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963)--which holds that "if the accused requests. he WAS provided with competent counsel and had lived in the US long enough to know the culture of the country. • ❑ --US District Court held that b/c the issue was not raised at trial that Breard was prohibited from raising it at appeal. ▼❑ US CONSTITUTION vs. Biological and Chemical) makes these actors MORE consequential and the right to defend against them more vital. within its consular district. the congressional act trumps. • ❑ **Held that a foreign state has NO right to overturn a conviction in the US that was obtained from a fair trial ▼ ❑ **Also held that the Treaty was upheld and would continue to be uphold until or unless a Congressional statute was passted that was contrary to the terms of the treaty. In those circumstances. • ❑ --signatories of the treaty cannot later pass a domestic law that completely annuls the merit and strength of the treaty. • ❑ LEX SUPERIOR DOCTOR: International Law w/ regard to this concept.▼ ❑ D NON-STATE ACTORS • ❑ 1 The proliferation of ABC weapons (Atomic. • ❑ E ▼ ❑ VII INTERACTION B/W INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC ACTORS ▼ ❑ A WHO ENFORCES BINDING OPINIONS w/r/t INTERNATIONAL LAW ▼❑ 1 Domestic Courts:(US courts and conflicts) ▼ ❑ a Breard Case: Paraguayan citizen was tried and convicted for the murder and attempted rape of a woman.

then a) they will be apprehensive about entering into one with the US and b) NOT hesitant to breach them--i. • ❑ Self-Executing: require no ratification. • ❑ a Russia is claiming self-defense. (president has no power to MAKE treaties absent the approval of congress) • ❑ GLARING PROBLEM: If the community views the US as not holding to their treaties.• ❑ --Constitution says that Treaties are the supreme law of the land but the Supreme Court differentiates between Self-Executing Treaties and Treaties Requiring Domestic Ratification. Seek friendly relations w/ other nations • ❑ 4. premised on the death of a . • ❑ Ratification Required Treaties: bind the US to bring the treaty up in Congress but does not bind them to the terms of the treaty. ▼ ❑ VIII CURRENT EVENTS ▼ ❑ A Russia/Georgia ▼❑ 1 US Goals? • ❑ a Protect Civilians (all of them) • ❑ b Keep Oil in Georgia • ❑ c Protect territorial integrity of new countries ▼❑ 2 Effect of Russia Recognizing S. ▼❑ 4 ICJ Case: Georgia is suing Russia for claims of Ethnic Cleansing. US citizens who are constantly traveling abroad or are located abroad could be in SERIOUS DANGER. Russia is counter-suing Georgia for the same. Defend Russian citizens & business interests • ❑ 5. Observing International Law • ❑ 2. Ossettia and Abhakazia's independence? • ❑ a legitimized the secession: (also recognized by Nicaruagua and the Hamas) ▼❑ 3 Menvedev (Russian President) Response to Conflict ▼ ❑ a Said he would adhere to 5 principles • ❑ 1. unless it is RATIFIED by congress. Claim of sphere of influence in the world.e. Rejecting US dominance of world affairs in a "unipolar" world • ❑ 3. • ❑ 1) First the President signs the Treaty ▼ ❑ 2) Then Congress has to approve it. Immediately binding upon signatories.

systematic murder. Appropriation of property through plunder • ❑ 4. ▼ ❑ c Pakistan responded by shooting at American Helicopters. ▼ ❑ Pakistan Instability: Bhutto. • ❑ --Bhutto's HUSBAND. Crimes against humanity (ethnic cleansing) • ❑ 3. Displaced citizens denied the right to return-IDP's=internally displaced citizens. ▼ ❑ B US/PAKISTAN ▼❑ 1 Ground Zero Skirmish: • ❑ a 9/8/2008. ▼ ❑ b Georgia's claims derive mostly from the 1965 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination: (CERD) • ❑ 1. attacks and rapes of Georgian citizens. ▼ ❑ c Relief sought by Georgia: • ❑ 1. But apparently someone up there felt that they had just reason for doing so. An order that Russia do the following: • ❑ a) immediately cease all military activity and remove all military personnel • ❑ b) ensure the return of IDP's safely • ❑ c) refrain from unlawful appropriation of homes and property belonging to the IDP's • ❑ d) ensure that remaining ethnic Georgians are not subject to discriminatory treatment. Widespread. • ❑ e)paying full compensation for the consequences of the ethnic cleansing and displacement of Georgian citizens. torture. • ❑ --Russia's accession to the CERD. there was a skirmish at ground zero (area on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan--Northwest Province) between the US and the Taliban. Zadari has just been inaugurated as the new President and promises to fight .UN peacekeeper (who was russian) during a ground skirmish. the former Pakistani Prime Minister was assassinated upon her return from exile (in the US--who protected her because they believed that she would be "tougher" on the Taliban than Musharraff. • ❑ 5. No access to education in the Georgian mother tongue • ❑ 2. a declaration that all claims against Russia are true ▼ ❑ 2. mandates jurisdiction. • ❑ b US Responded to the skirmish by calling an AIRSTRIKE which ending up killing several Pakastani border patrol guards. ▼ ❑ Issue: Were the American's allowed to cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan? • ❑ Technically NO.

. The targets where Mr. and his two eldest sons. Both were not present during the attack. ▼❑ 2 Haqqanit Family (known Taliban Supporters) Home Attack: • ❑ a US air strike. THEY claim that Mr. Haqqani is such a wonderful asset (for attracting Taliban members) and THAT is why that have not yet moved against him. himself. They are reliably rumored to be working with and supporting the Jihad. ▼ ❑ b Why Pakistan hasn't Moved Against the Haqqanis? • ❑ --The ISI (Inter-Services-Intelligence)--like the CIA of pakistan--has great influential power. occurring in south Waziristan killed civilian members of the Haqqani family."vigorously" against the Taliban. ▼❑ --Bush's Justification??--Self-Defense (911) • ❑ --problem?? Attack took place during the holy moth of Ramadan. Haqqani. ▼ ❑ Bushie BooBoo: actually authorized and ordered US troops to carry out ground assaults on Pakistan w/o PRIOR approval of the Pakistan government for crossing into its territory.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.