The Risk of Obsolescence: Reframing the Contemporary Use of Force Model to Achieve a More Holistic Application of the UN Charter Jus Ad Bellum Construct

IF 0.4 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
B. Cox
{"title":"The Risk of Obsolescence: Reframing the Contemporary Use of Force Model to Achieve a More Holistic Application of the UN Charter Jus Ad Bellum Construct","authors":"B. Cox","doi":"10.1017/cyl.2021.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article challenges the effectiveness of the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model that is centred on a decidedly narrow selection of relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations (UN Charter). In the now seventy-five years of the UN Charter era, predominant modes of armed conflict have evolved so as to be largely unrecognizable when compared to the model of war that was contemplated when negotiating and ratifying the Charter. Nonetheless, modes of engaging with an actual or contemplated use of force remain rooted in a model developed more than seven decades ago. This article suggests that a new frame of analysis is needed. The “Reframer” approach and “Purposes and Principles” model developed herein remain just as firmly grounded in the UN Charter as the prevailing interpretation. However, this novel approach and model incorporate a degree of nuance and adaptiveness that is not feasible when applying the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model.","PeriodicalId":52441,"journal":{"name":"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international","volume":"58 1","pages":"263 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Canadian yearbook of international law. Annuaire canadien de droit international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2021.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article challenges the effectiveness of the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model that is centred on a decidedly narrow selection of relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations (UN Charter). In the now seventy-five years of the UN Charter era, predominant modes of armed conflict have evolved so as to be largely unrecognizable when compared to the model of war that was contemplated when negotiating and ratifying the Charter. Nonetheless, modes of engaging with an actual or contemplated use of force remain rooted in a model developed more than seven decades ago. This article suggests that a new frame of analysis is needed. The “Reframer” approach and “Purposes and Principles” model developed herein remain just as firmly grounded in the UN Charter as the prevailing interpretation. However, this novel approach and model incorporate a degree of nuance and adaptiveness that is not feasible when applying the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model.
过时的风险:重新构建当代武力使用模式,以实现更全面地应用联合国宪章的“战权”概念
摘要这篇文章挑战了对当代武力使用模式的主流解释的有效性,该模式以《联合国宪章》(《联合国章程》)相关条款的绝对狭隘选择为中心。在《联合国宪章》时代的七十五年里,主要的武装冲突模式已经演变,与谈判和批准《宪章》时设想的战争模式相比,在很大程度上是不可识别的。尽管如此,实际或预期使用武力的模式仍然植根于70多年前发展起来的模式。这篇文章提出需要一个新的分析框架。本文提出的“Reframer”方法和“宗旨与原则”模式与现行解释一样,仍然牢固地植根于《联合国宪章》。然而,这种新颖的方法和模式包含了一定程度的细微差别和适应性,这在应用当代武力使用模式的主流解释时是不可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信