FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2285901189> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2285901189 endingPage "560" @default.
• W2285901189 startingPage "521" @default.
• W2285901189 abstract "[This article critically evaluates the legality of the use of force in 2003 by the United States and its allies against Iraq. The author considers the three main arguments advanced to justify the war: the use of force was authorised by existing United Nations Security Council resolutions; the use of force was justified pursuant to the legal doctrine of self-defence; and the use of force in Iraq was within the scope of humanitarian intervention. The author maintains that the current state of international law gives rise to the conclusion that the use of force against Iraq was probably not legal. However, the author contends that the combined threat of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, as well as the changing values of the international community, are precipitating a paradigm shift in international law. This paradigm shift may in time result in a broadening of the notion of 'imminent threat' as it applies to the law of self-defence. It may also result in an expansion of the concept of humanitarian intervention and in the evolution of a customary rule of international law providing for humanitarian intervention in certain circumstances. Thus, whilst the use of force against Iraq was probably not legal in 2003, a similar type of war may be legal in years to come.] CONTENTS I Preamble II Introduction III Was the Use of Force against Iraq Authorised by Existing UN Security Council Resolutions? A The Role of the UN Security Council B The Resolutions Relating to Iraq C Did Existing Resolutions Authorise the Use of Force? D Conclusion IV Was the Use of Force against Iraq Legal Pursuant to the Doctrine of Self-Defence? A Introduction B The Threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction and Terrorism 1 The Threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction 2 The Threat of Terrorism 3 Conclusion C The Law of Self-Defence 1 Introduction 2 Is Anticipatory Self-Defence Lawful? 3 Did the 2003 War against Iraq Fall within the Legal Limits of Anticipatory Self-Defence? D The Emergence of a New Doctrine? V Was the Use of Force against Iraq Legal Pursuant to the Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention? A Introduction B The Case against Iraq C The Legality of Humanitarian Intervention 1 Introduction 2 A Non-Legal Perspective 3 The UN Charter 4 Customary International Law 5 Conclusion D The Fundamental Criteria of a Future Norm of Humanitarian Intervention E A Different Conception of Humanitarian Intervention F Summation VI Conclusion I PREAMBLE The recent international dispute between the United States (and its allies) (1) and Iraq saw all sides of the dispute propounding numerous assumptions as facts. Given that an acceptance of the information that Iraq proffered as fact would clearly lead to the conclusion that the US use of force was in breach of international law, the author proposes, for argument's sake, to treat certain US assertions as fact. Consequently, this article is based on a number of assumptions; in particular that prior to the US invasion of Iraq, the US had a reasonable apprehension that: 1 Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction ('WMD'); 2 Iraq possessed ballistic missiles with live warhead (2) ranges greater than 150 kilometres; and 3 Iraq sponsored terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda. The author acknowledges the controversial nature of these assumptions, and recognises that their evidentiary bases have been seriously challenged. This article also treats the following as factual: 1 Iraq materially breached numerous United Nations Security Council resolutions; and 2 Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator who extensively violated the human rights of numerous individuals within and outside of Iraq. …" @default.
• W2285901189 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2285901189 creator A5046619402 @default.
• W2285901189 date "2003-10-01" @default.
• W2285901189 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2285901189 title "Operation Iraqi Freedom: United States V. Iraq - the Legality of the War" @default.
• W2285901189 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W2285901189 type Work @default.
• W2285901189 sameAs 2285901189 @default.
• W2285901189 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W2285901189 countsByYear W22859011892019 @default.
• W2285901189 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2285901189 hasAuthorship W2285901189A5046619402 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C185436325 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C203133693 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2776729102 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2777095168 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2779298689 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2779921323 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2779980412 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C2780665704 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C42027317 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C118552586 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C15744967 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C17744445 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C185436325 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C199539241 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C203133693 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2776211767 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2776729102 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2777095168 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2779298689 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2779921323 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2779980412 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C2780665704 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C42027317 @default.
• W2285901189 hasConceptScore W2285901189C55447825 @default.
• W2285901189 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2285901189 hasLocation W22859011891 @default.
• W2285901189 hasOpenAccess W2285901189 @default.
• W2285901189 hasPrimaryLocation W22859011891 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W1063157117 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W1508246948 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W1533045065 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W1796506275 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W1853319907 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2079488196 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2191269074 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2303930656 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2479225909 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2491744892 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2494498392 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2622485050 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W3123618555 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W3123788438 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W3125147758 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W3164087066 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W40109820 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W94803048 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2113959125 @default.
• W2285901189 hasRelatedWork W2604319923 @default.
• W2285901189 hasVolume "4" @default.
• W2285901189 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2285901189 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2285901189 magId "2285901189" @default.
• W2285901189 workType "article" @default.