‘Antisocial Behaviour, Unfriendly Relations’: Assessing the Contemporary Value of the Categories of Unfriendly Acts and Retorsion in International Law

IF 1.1 Q2 LAW
N. McDonald, Anna McLeod
{"title":"‘Antisocial Behaviour, Unfriendly Relations’: Assessing the Contemporary Value of the Categories of Unfriendly Acts and Retorsion in International Law","authors":"N. McDonald, Anna McLeod","doi":"10.1093/jcsl/krab011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article considers the international law categories of unfriendly acts and retorsion in the modern context. To date, these categories articulating the freedoms that States enjoy below the threshold of international wrongfulness have received little attention in academic debate. But we consider both categories are of increasing relevance in the context of modern international conflict (in the broadest sense) and inter-State competition, particularly in relation to the regulation of hostile cyber activity between States. Unfriendly acts denotes State activity which, while lawful as a matter of international law, would nonetheless not be welcomed by the States it targets. Retorsion covers another sub-set of lawful but unfriendly State activity, substantively the same as unfriendly acts but done in response to prior unwelcome acts of other States. Having defined these categories, including by reference to a survey of contemporary State practice and judicial treatment, this article then considers why their utility and relevance to States are increasing. The article ends on the cautionary note that while unfriendly acts and retorsion may be increasingly necessary and desirable to States as international law tools as hostile activity occupies more of the space below forcible acts, they equally need to be properly understood and ‘handled with care’ by international lawyers, to ensure they are not bestowed with legal characteristics they do not possess, unduly constraining States in the process. The risk of misuse of these categories by States also needs to be kept in mind.","PeriodicalId":43908,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krab011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article considers the international law categories of unfriendly acts and retorsion in the modern context. To date, these categories articulating the freedoms that States enjoy below the threshold of international wrongfulness have received little attention in academic debate. But we consider both categories are of increasing relevance in the context of modern international conflict (in the broadest sense) and inter-State competition, particularly in relation to the regulation of hostile cyber activity between States. Unfriendly acts denotes State activity which, while lawful as a matter of international law, would nonetheless not be welcomed by the States it targets. Retorsion covers another sub-set of lawful but unfriendly State activity, substantively the same as unfriendly acts but done in response to prior unwelcome acts of other States. Having defined these categories, including by reference to a survey of contemporary State practice and judicial treatment, this article then considers why their utility and relevance to States are increasing. The article ends on the cautionary note that while unfriendly acts and retorsion may be increasingly necessary and desirable to States as international law tools as hostile activity occupies more of the space below forcible acts, they equally need to be properly understood and ‘handled with care’ by international lawyers, to ensure they are not bestowed with legal characteristics they do not possess, unduly constraining States in the process. The risk of misuse of these categories by States also needs to be kept in mind.
“反社会行为,不友好关系”:评估国际法中不友好行为及其反制范畴的当代价值
本文论述了在现代语境下不友好行为和报复的国际法范畴。迄今为止,这些阐明国家在国际不法性阈值以下享有的自由的类别在学术辩论中很少受到关注。但我们认为,在现代国际冲突(从最广泛的意义上讲)和国家间竞争的背景下,特别是在监管国家之间的敌对网络活动方面,这两类问题的相关性越来越大。不友好行为是指国家活动,尽管根据国际法是合法的,但不受其目标国家的欢迎。Retorsion涵盖了另一组合法但不友好的国家活动,实质上与不友好行为相同,但是针对其他国家先前不受欢迎的行为而进行的。在界定了这些类别之后,包括通过参考对当代国家实践和司法待遇的调查,本条接着审议了为什么它们对国家的效用和相关性正在增加。该条最后提醒注意,尽管不友好行为和报复作为国际法工具对各国来说可能越来越必要和可取,因为敌对活动在强迫行为之下占据了更多的空间,但国际律师同样需要正确理解和“谨慎处理”这些行为,以确保它们不会被赋予它们不具备的法律特征,从而在这一过程中不适当地约束各国。还需要铭记各国滥用这些类别的风险。
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
1.30
自引率
25.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: The Journal of Conflict & Security Law is a thrice yearly refereed journal aimed at academics, government officials, military lawyers and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals interested in the areas of arms control law, the law of armed conflict (international humanitarian law) and collective security law. The Journal covers the whole spectrum of international law relating to armed conflict from the pre-conflict stage when the issues include those of arms control, disarmament, and conflict prevention and discussions of the legality of the resort to force, through to the outbreak of armed conflict when attention turns to the coverage of the conduct of military operations and the protection of non-combatants by international humanitarian law.
×
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