Article

Irreconcilable differences : the threshold for armed attack and international armed conflict

Laurie R. Blank

• Notre Dame law review, Vol. 96, 2020, p. 249-290

English

Source : http://ndlawreview.org/publications/archives/volume-96-issue-1-2/ (last accessed on 02.02.2022)

This article explores the gap between the definition of armed attack and the threshold for international armed conflict to identify possible consequences of the different definitions for the application of either or both bodies of law and to consider whether efforts to reconcile the different meanings are feasible and, more importantly, desirable or problematic. Although the dangers of conflating jus ad bellum and LOAC are well-known and thoroughly examined in jurisprudence and academic literature, the interplay between these two foundational concepts in the two bodies of law remains unexplored. These two definitions or concepts are the building blocks on which much of the international law authority regarding the use of force resides. The interplay and different thresholds for armed attack and for international armed conflict raise challenging questions about the co-existence of the two bodies of law, namely the consequences of an international armed conflict triggered by acts or force that lie below the threshold for armed attack or other triggering of jus ad bellum. Can force be used and how should it be judged in such circumstances?

• Full text
• More information is available for logged in users