从消失点回到核心:网络战争法的发展对一般国际法的影响

K. Mačák
{"title":"从消失点回到核心:网络战争法的发展对一般国际法的影响","authors":"K. Mačák","doi":"10.23919/CYCON.2017.8240333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The law of war was famously described by Sir Hersch Lauterpacht as being ‘at the vanishing point of international law’. However, in a historical twist, international legal scrutiny of cyber operations emerged and developed precisely through the optics of the law of war. This paper analyses the influence that the development of the cyber law of war has had and might yet have on the ‘core’ of international law, in other words, on general international law. It analyses three key dimensions of the relationship between the law of war and general international law: systemic, conceptual, and teleological. It argues that, firstly, a systemic-level shift has taken place in the discourse, resulting in the academic debate and state focus moving from law-of-war questions to questions of general international law including sovereignty, non-intervention, and state responsibility. A better understanding of this trend should allay the fears of fragmentation of international law and inform the debate about the relationship between the law of war and ‘core’ international law. Secondly, this development has created fertile grounds for certain concepts to migrate from the law of war, where they had emerged, developed or consolidated, into general international law. A case in point is the functionality test, which originated as a compromise solution to determine whether a cyber operation amounts to an ‘attack’ under the law of war, but which may offer additional utility in other areas of international law including the law of state sovereignty and the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into consideration before introducing its rules and principles to different law. Secondly, this trend has allowed for specific concepts to migrate from the law of war where they had originated, evolved or consolidated and to influence other areas of international law. An illustrative example is the functionality test, which offers significant utility for the law of state sovereignty as well as the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into account before introducing its rules and principles to different normative contexts. Paradoxically, a blanket transplantation of these norms might in practice jeopardise the underlying humanitarian considerations.","PeriodicalId":423770,"journal":{"name":"2017 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From the vanishing point back to the core: The impact of the development of the cyber law of war on general international law\",\"authors\":\"K. Mačák\",\"doi\":\"10.23919/CYCON.2017.8240333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The law of war was famously described by Sir Hersch Lauterpacht as being ‘at the vanishing point of international law’. However, in a historical twist, international legal scrutiny of cyber operations emerged and developed precisely through the optics of the law of war. This paper analyses the influence that the development of the cyber law of war has had and might yet have on the ‘core’ of international law, in other words, on general international law. It analyses three key dimensions of the relationship between the law of war and general international law: systemic, conceptual, and teleological. It argues that, firstly, a systemic-level shift has taken place in the discourse, resulting in the academic debate and state focus moving from law-of-war questions to questions of general international law including sovereignty, non-intervention, and state responsibility. A better understanding of this trend should allay the fears of fragmentation of international law and inform the debate about the relationship between the law of war and ‘core’ international law. Secondly, this development has created fertile grounds for certain concepts to migrate from the law of war, where they had emerged, developed or consolidated, into general international law. A case in point is the functionality test, which originated as a compromise solution to determine whether a cyber operation amounts to an ‘attack’ under the law of war, but which may offer additional utility in other areas of international law including the law of state sovereignty and the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into consideration before introducing its rules and principles to different law. Secondly, this trend has allowed for specific concepts to migrate from the law of war where they had originated, evolved or consolidated and to influence other areas of international law. An illustrative example is the functionality test, which offers significant utility for the law of state sovereignty as well as the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into account before introducing its rules and principles to different normative contexts. Paradoxically, a blanket transplantation of these norms might in practice jeopardise the underlying humanitarian considerations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":423770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23919/CYCON.2017.8240333\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23919/CYCON.2017.8240333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

赫希·劳特帕赫特爵士曾将战争法描述为“国际法的消失点”。然而,在一个历史转折中,对网络行动的国际法律审查正是通过战争法的视角出现和发展起来的。本文分析了网络战争法的发展对国际法的“核心”,即对一般国际法的影响。它分析了战争法和一般国际法之间关系的三个关键维度:系统、概念和目的论。文章认为,首先,话语发生了系统层面的转变,导致学术辩论和国家关注的焦点从战争法问题转向包括主权、不干涉和国家责任在内的一般国际法问题。更好地理解这一趋势应能减轻对国际法分裂的担忧,并为有关战争法与“核心”国际法之间关系的辩论提供信息。第二,这种发展创造了肥沃的土壤,使某些概念从战争法中产生、发展或巩固成为一般国际法。一个典型的例子是功能测试,它最初是一种折衷的解决方案,用于确定网络行动是否构成战争法下的“攻击”,但它可能在其他国际法领域提供额外的效用,包括国家主权法和军备控制与裁军法。然而,第三,在将战争法的规则和原则引入不同的法律之前,必须考虑到战争法独特的目的论基础。第二,这一趋势使具体概念得以从产生、演变或巩固这些概念的战争法移出,并影响到国际法的其他领域。一个说明性的例子是功能测试,它为国家主权法以及军备控制和裁军法提供了重要的效用。然而,第三,在将战争法的规则和原则引入不同的规范背景之前,必须考虑到战争法独特的目的论基础。矛盾的是,全盘移植这些准则实际上可能会危及根本的人道主义考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From the vanishing point back to the core: The impact of the development of the cyber law of war on general international law
The law of war was famously described by Sir Hersch Lauterpacht as being ‘at the vanishing point of international law’. However, in a historical twist, international legal scrutiny of cyber operations emerged and developed precisely through the optics of the law of war. This paper analyses the influence that the development of the cyber law of war has had and might yet have on the ‘core’ of international law, in other words, on general international law. It analyses three key dimensions of the relationship between the law of war and general international law: systemic, conceptual, and teleological. It argues that, firstly, a systemic-level shift has taken place in the discourse, resulting in the academic debate and state focus moving from law-of-war questions to questions of general international law including sovereignty, non-intervention, and state responsibility. A better understanding of this trend should allay the fears of fragmentation of international law and inform the debate about the relationship between the law of war and ‘core’ international law. Secondly, this development has created fertile grounds for certain concepts to migrate from the law of war, where they had emerged, developed or consolidated, into general international law. A case in point is the functionality test, which originated as a compromise solution to determine whether a cyber operation amounts to an ‘attack’ under the law of war, but which may offer additional utility in other areas of international law including the law of state sovereignty and the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into consideration before introducing its rules and principles to different law. Secondly, this trend has allowed for specific concepts to migrate from the law of war where they had originated, evolved or consolidated and to influence other areas of international law. An illustrative example is the functionality test, which offers significant utility for the law of state sovereignty as well as the law of arms control and disarmament. Thirdly, however, it is imperative that the unique teleological underpinning of the law of war is taken into account before introducing its rules and principles to different normative contexts. Paradoxically, a blanket transplantation of these norms might in practice jeopardise the underlying humanitarian considerations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信