Article

Of occupation, jus ad bellum and jus in bello : a reply to Solon Solomon’s "the great oxymoron : jus in bello violations as legitimate non-forcible measures of self-defense : the post-disengagement Israeli measures towards Gaza as a case study"

Vaios Koutroulis

• Chinese journal of international law, Vol. 10, no. 4, December 2011, p. 897-914

English

Photocopies

This reply critically addresses three arguments advanced in Solon Solomon's article. Firstly, it underscores the existing doubts as to the evolution of the right to self-defense towards encompassing operations against non-State actors. Secondly, it demonstrates that, contrary to Solomon's suggestion, Gaza continues to be occupied by Israel after the 2005 disengagement. This qualification blocks Israel from invoking its jus ad bellum right to self-defense against actions emanating from Gaza. Finally, this reply argues that, even if the self-defense argument is accepted, the legality of Israeli measures under international law depends on their conformity with both jus ad bellum and jus in bello, since both legal regimes are independent from one another and apply simultaneously to Israeli actions.