Details

<p>1. Introduction.-</p><p>Part I: Pre-Charter Customary Law on Self-Defence.</p><p>2 Self-defence in ancient and medieval natural law.</p><p>3 Self-defence as a measure short of war.          </p><p>4 Self-defence as an exception to the prohibition of war.           </p><p>5 The right of self-defence and the drafting of the UN Charter.</p><p>6 The temporal dimension of self-defence at the time of the Charter.-</p><p>Part II: Post-Charter Customary Law on Self-Defence.</p><p>7 The right of self-defence in the Judgments of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals.</p><p>8 Self-defence in state-to-state conflicts.</p><p>9 Self-defence and weapons of mass destruction.</p><p>10 Self-defence against non-state actors.</p><p>11 The interpretation of self-defence and the United Nations.</p><p>12 The temporal dimension of post-Charter self-defence.-</p><p>Part III: Anticipatory Action in Self-Defence and International Customary Law.</p><p>13 The legality of anticipatory action in self-defence.</p><p>14 The limits of anticipatory action in self-defence.</p>

<span style="font-family: tahoma;">This book ‘Anticipatory Action in Self-Defence - Essence and Limits under International’ won the </span><strong style="font-family: tahoma;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family: Calibri , sans-serif;">ASIL Francis Lieber Prize </span></strong><strong style="font-family: tahoma;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family: Calibri , sans-serif;font-weight: normal;">in</span></strong><strong style="font-family: tahoma;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family: Calibri , sans-serif;"> 2012</span></strong><strong style="font-family: tahoma;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family: Calibri , sans-serif;font-weight: normal;">. </span></strong><p class="MsoNormal"><span></span></p>

<p>The legality of preemptive strikes is one of the most controversial questions of contemporary international law. At the core of this controversy stands the temporal dimension of self-defence: when and for how long can a state defend itself against an armed attack? Can it resort to armed force before such an attack occurs? Is anticipatory action covered by the rules of self-defence or should it be treated as a different concept?</p><p>This book examines whether anticipatory action in self-defence is part of customary international law and, if so, under what conditions. The pre-Charter concept of anticipatory action is demarcated and then assessed against post-Charter state practice. Several instances of self-defence – both anticipatory and remedial – are examined to elucidate the rules governing the temporal dimension of the right. The Six-Day War (1967), the Israeli bombing of an Iraqi reactor (1981), the US invasion of Iraq (2003) and other instances of state practice are given thorough attention.</p><p>The innovative mark of this book is its comprehensive focus on the temporal dimension and, particularly, the anticipatory aspect of self-defence. By way of conclusion, the definition and limits of anticipatory action in self-defence are incorporated into an accessible formula.</p><p>The book is highly recommended to academics and legal advisers – ministries of foreign affairs and defence – as well as to international organizations, military academies and journalists.</p><p> </p><p>Kinga Tibori Szabó is presently working at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, The Hague, The Netherlands.</p><p>With a Foreword by Pieter H. Kooijmans, former judge in the International Court of Justice</p><p></p>

<p>Comprehensive, historical and legal analysis on preemptive strikes.</p><p>Focus on temporal dimension and anticipatory aspect of self-defence.</p><p>Incorporates essence and limits of preemptive strikes into accessible formula.</p><p>Compares the temporal issue in cases such as the Cuban missile crisis (1962), the Israeli bombing of the Osirak reactor (1981) and the US war against Iraq (2003).</p>

<p>Comprehensive, historical and legal analysis on preemptive strikes. </p><p>Focus on temporal dimension and anticipatory aspect of self-defence. </p><p>Incorporates essence and limits of preemptive strikes into accessible formula. </p><p>Compares the temporal issue in cases such as the Cuban missile crisis (1962), the Israeli bombing of the Osirak reactor (1981) and the US war against Iraq (2003).</p>

NL