5cjxburmr

The United States has expressed the view that the definition of the act of aggression inthe Kampala amendments to the Rome Statute does not reflect customary international law. 2151.11.4 Rationales for the Resort to Force.1.11.4.1 Use of Force in Self-Defense. The right to use force in self-defense is aninherent right of States. 2161.11.4.2 Use of Force Authorized by the U.N. Security Council Acting UnderChapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. Chapter VII of the Charter of the UnitedNations provides that the U.N. Security Council may take such action by air, sea, or land forcesas may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace or security, includingdemonstrations, blockade, and other military operations. 2171.11.4.3 Use of Force With the Consent of the Territorial State. Military action inthe territory of another State is not a violation of Article 2(4)’s prohibition against the use offorce against that State where it consents to such military action. 2181.11.4.4 Humanitarian Intervention. Violations of law of war treaties applicableto non-international armed conflict generally have not been understood to provide anindependent basis for intervening in a State. 219Although the United Kingdom and certain other States have argued that intervention forhumanitarian reasons may be a legal basis for the resort to force, the United States has not215 Refer to § 18.20.3.4 (ICC and the Crime of Aggression).216 Refer to § 1.11.5 (Use of Force in Self-Defense).217 U.N. CHARTER art. 42 (“Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would beinadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessaryto maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, andother operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.”).218 For example, Davis R. Robinson, Department of State Legal Adviser, Letter to Professor Edward Gordon,Chairman of the Committee on Grenada Section on International Law and Practice American Bar Association onThe Legal Position of the United States on the Action taken in Grenada (Feb. 10, 1984), reprinted in 18INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS 381 (1984) (“In the case of the action taken in Grenada, the legal position of the UnitedStates was based upon the application of a combination of three well established principles of international law…(1) the lawful governmental authorities of a State may invite the assistance in its territory of military forces of otherstates or collective organizations in dealing with internal disorder as well as external threats.”); Statement of theU.S. Government, attached to Adlai E. Stevenson, Letter Dated 24 November 1964 From the PermanentRepresentative of the United States of America Addressed to the President of the Security Council, U.N. Doc.S/6062, Nov. 24, 1964 (“The United States Government has just received confirmation that a short time ago - earlymorning of 24 November in the Congo - a unit of Belgian paratroopers, carried by United States military transportplanes, landed at Stanleyville in the Congo. This landing has been made (1) with the authorization of theGovernment of the Congo, (2) in conformity with our adherence to the Geneva Conventions, and (3) in exercise ofour clear responsibility to protect United States citizens under the circumstances existing in the Stanleyville area.”).219 Refer to § 17.18.1 (Duty of Non-Belligerent States to Refrain From Supporting Hostilities by Non-State ArmedGroups Against Other States).45