Tanaya Raut, Symbiosis Law School, Nagpur
ABSTRACT
The integral right of sovereign states to defend themselves from external hostility in the international sphere lies in their own hands and with their allies. As per Article 511 of the United Nations Charter, all the member states have an inherent right of the individual as well as collective self-defence against foreign aggression faced by way of armed attacks. The contemporary dispute between Israel and Palestine has shaken international peace and has left the civilians in these respective states as well as in the neighbouring states intensely affected more than ever after the October 7 attacks by Hamas. Daniel Bethlehem in his article PRINCIPLES RELEVANT TO THE SCOPE OF A STATE’S RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST AN IMMINENT OR ACTUAL ARMED ATTACK BY NONSTATE ACTORS has provided 16 principles which need to be observed while the exercise of this right, where he has thrust upon the concepts of necessity, imminence and proportionality of the force used by the defending state (here Israel) upon the host state (here Palestine) which aids the non-state actors which in the present scenario is Hamas2. In this paper, the researcher will primarily focus on the provisions prescribed under the UN Charter, the important judicial responses of the International Court of Justice and the Customary International Law and then the principles suggested by Bethlehem and will later try to assess whether these principles would have fit into the current issue and whether any better and reasonable steps could both the host as well as the defending state have taken to curb the inhumane menace birthed by the extremist right-wing communal groups of both the nations. The paper will also give a glimpse of the failure of the UN in its peacekeeping duty and the interference of politically strong nations worsening the situation. Further, the paper will also sum up the many peace efforts taken by the world to reach a two-state solution and whether it was all ineffectual due to a lack of political will or international law being weak law.
Keywords: International Framework, Pre-emptive Self-defence, Longstanding Friction, Desired Modus Operandi, Hegemonic International Law, Collective Measures
Comments