Self Defence

As we have previously noted here, the inquiry established by the UK to examine the UK's involvement in the Iraq War has spent some time taking evidence on the legal justification put forward by the UK for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as well as on the manner in which legal advice on the issue was formulated and presented.

Self-defense in response to armed attacks by non-state actors is undoubtedly one of the most interesting - and controversial - issues in modern international law. It is of great practical relevance, as for instance, with the ongoing use of drones for the targeted killings of suspected terrorists (a question I've discussed here), and has attracted a great deal of…

Ken Anderson has an excellent, very interesting post regarding the US strategy of using drones for targeted killings of suspected terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere (a topic we've addressed at the blog before). He argues that, as a matter of both law and policy, the current justification of the US government for its targeted killing practices is insufficient,…

I agree entirely with the first point that Professor Paust makes in his previous post , about the impossibility of imputing the non-state actor attacks to Pakistan due to incapacity. Certainly imputation doesn't make sense on these facts as he outlines them. However, the second point he makes goes to the heart of my question. Professor Paust asks,…