Legitimate use of military force against state-sponsored - Air University

12. See Rosalyn Higgins, “The Legal Limits to the Use of Force by Sovereign States:
United Nations Practice,” in British Year Book of International Law, 1961, vol. 37 (Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press for Royal Institute for International Affairs, 1962), 307.
13. See Bowett, “Collective Self-Defence,” 130.
14. Bowett, Self-Defence, 238.
15. For a discussion, see Higgins, 307.
16. Bowett, Self-Defence, 244.
17. Ibid., 218.
18. “Report on Use of Force,” 208.
19. Oscar Schachter, “In Defense of International Rules on the Use of Force,”
University of Chicago Law Review 53, no. 1 (Winter 1986): 120.
20. See John Norton Moore, “The Lawfulness of Military Assistance to the Republic
of Vietnam,” in The Vietnam War and International Law, ed. Richard A. Falk, vol. 1 (Princeton.
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1968), 237-70; Myres S. McDougal and Florentino P.
Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press,
1961), 248; Oscar Schachter, “The Right of States to Use Armed Force,” Michigan Law Review
82 (April-May 1984): 1638-39; and Sir Humphrey Waldock. “The Regulation of the Use of
Force by Individual States in International Law,” Recueil des Cours 81, pt. 2 (1952), 504.
21. Moore, “Lawfulness of Military Assistance,’’ 237.
22. Waldock, 504.
23. Thomas M. Franck, “Who Killed Article 2(4)? or: Changing Norms Governing
the Use of Force by States,” American Journal of International Law 64, no. 4 (October 1970):
832.
24. See “Charter of the United Nations,” art. 53. See also for discussion, Bowett, Self-
Defence, 241-42; Lloyd N. Cutler, “The Right to Intervene,’’ Foreign Affairs 64, no. 1 (Fall
1985): 96; Higgins, 270-71 and 297-98; Schachter, “The Right of States,” 1641; and Gerhard
von Glahn, Law Among Nations, 3d ed. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1976), 167.
25. See “Charter of the United Nations,” art. 54. See also Bowett, Self-Defence, 219-
20.
26. Moore, “Grenada,’’ 156. Moore also quotes Leland M. Goodrich, E. Hambro, and
A. P. Simons from their book Charter of the United Nations written in 1969 as follows:
In the [Security] Council discussion [concerning the Dominican crisis of 1965],
one representative pointed out that the expression “enforcement action”
presupposed the existence of something to be enforced, and that consequently
enforcement of a recommendation, as contained in the OAS resolution, was a
contradiction in terms. He also stressed that the OAS was carrying out a
conciliatory mission, its forces were not there in support of any claim against the
state, and its function was that of pacific settlement under Article 52 and not that
of enforcement under Article 53. This appears to have been the view of the
majority of Council members.
Moore, “Grenada,” 155.
27. Certain Expenses of the United Nations, advisory opinion, 1962 ICJ 155.
28. Moore, “Grenada,’’ 159. The problems created for a nation that has no regional
organization through which it can work are evident in the comparison between the US action to