The Threat of Force in International Law: 53 (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, Series Number 53)
Cambridge University Press, 2007-07-19
EAN 9780521873888, ISBN10: 0521873886
Hardcover, 384 pages, 23.3 x 16.7 x 3.1 cm
Language: English
Threats of force are a common feature of international politics, advocated by some as an economical guarantee against the outbreak of war and condemned by others as a recipe for war. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter forbids states to use threats of force, yet the meaning of the prohibition is unclear. This book provides the first comprehensive appraisal of the no-threat principle: its origin, underlying rationale, theoretical implications, relevant jurisprudence, and how it has withstood the test of time from 1945 to the present. Based on a systematic evaluation of state and United Nations practices, the book identifies what constitutes a threat of force and when its use is justified under the United Nations Charter. In so doing, it relates the no-threat principle to important concepts of the twentieth century, such as deterrence, escalation, crisis management, and what has been aptly described as the 'diplomacy of violence'.
'Nikolas Sturchler deserves not only the credit for having submitted the first comprehensive analysis on 'Art. 2 (4)'s blind spot', but also for having approached this subject matter in a well-balanced, historically informed and excellently written manner. The overall objective of his treatise is to both explore the legal meaning of the no-threat principle and to draw conclusions on how it operates in practice and it shall be stated right at the outset that Sturchler succeeds in achieving this aim. ... Sturchler's book is an excellent piece of academic work which deserves wide readership, not only with a view to the detailed and standard-setting examination of State practice contained therein.' Alexander Proelf 'Sturchler has accomplished an admirable piece of work, setting a high standard especially for those who seek to study state practice in a systematic, non-impressionistic way. He combines finesse in legal thinking with a thorough knowledge of international relations readings. While breaking new ground on an important legal subject , he never overreaches himself.' Leiden Journal of International Law