The Use of Force against International Terrorism: Everything Changes, Nothing Remains Still

AuthorMaría José Cervell Hortal
PositionAssociate Professor (Profesora Titular) in Public International Law and International Relations, University of Murcia, This work was carried out within the framework of the Der 2015-64205-R, MINECO/FEDER Project 'La Lucha de Civilizaciones (El Estado Islámico): retos y consecuencias para Naciones Unidas, la Comunidad Internacional y su Derecho....
Pages47-65
Paix et Securité Internationales
ISSN 2341-0868, Num. 6, janvier-décembre 2018, pp. 47-65
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Paix_secur_int.2018.i6.03
47
THE USE OF FORCE AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRRORISM:
EVERYTHING CHANGES, NOTHING REMAINS STILL
El uso de la fuerza armada contra el terrorismo internacional:
todo cambia, nada permanece
L’emploi de la force contre le terrorisme international: tout
passe et rien ne demeure
María José CERVELL HORTAL1
I. -INTRODUCTION. II. -PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FORCE AND THE
INCURSION OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM: FIRST RESPONSES FROM
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY. III.- THE USE OF FORCE IN SELF-
DEFENCE AGAINST TERRORISM: IS THIS CONCEPT TOO RIGID? III.-
OTHER OPTIONS FOR USING FORCE LEGITIMATELY. IV.- CONCLUSIONS.
ABSTRACT: This article analyses the legality of international society’s reactions to terrorism with
the use of force. It considers, in particular, the cases where States have interpreted the use of force
prohibition and the right to self-defence extensively and whether international rules are evolving to
permit more effective protection against the terrorist threat.
KEY WORDS: Use of force, self defence, terrorism.
RESUMEN: Este artículo analiza la legalidad de las reacciones armadas de la sociedad internacio-
nal ante el terrorismo. Se valora, en particular, en qué casos los Estados han interpretado de manera
extensiva la prohibición del uso de la fuerza y el derecho de legítima defensa y en qué medida las
normas internacionales pueden estar evolucionando para permitir una respuesta más efectiva frente
a la amenaza terrorista.
PALABRAS CLAVES: uso de la fuerza, terrorismo, legítima defensa.
RESUMÉ: Cet article analyse la légalité des réactions armées de la société international devant le
1 Associate Professor (Profesora Titular) in Public International Law and International
Relations, University of Murcia, This work was carried out within the framework of the
Der 2015-64205-R, MINECO/FEDER Project “La Lucha de Civilizaciones (El Estado
Islámico): retos y consecuencias para Naciones Unidas, la Comunidad Internacional y
su Derecho. ¿Una “Alianza de Civilizaciones” contra el Estado Islámico?”, with Cesáreo
Gutiérrez Espada and María José Cervell Hortal being the Principal Investigators). ORCID
iD https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2443-4762.
PAIX ET SÉCURITÉ INTERNATIONALES
Journal of International Law and International Relations
Num 6, janvier-décembre 2018 | ISSN 2341-0868
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Paix_secur_int.2018.i6.03
Citation: CERVELL HORTAL, M. J., «The Use of Force against International Terrorrism: Everything Changes,
Nothing Remains Still», Paix et Sécurité Internationales, num. 6, 2018, pp. 47-65
Received: 17 July 2018
Accepted: 15 October 2018
The Use of Force Against International Terrorism: Everything Changes, Nothing Remains Still
Paix et Securité Internationales
ISSN 2341-0868, Num. 6, janvier-décembre 2018, pp. 47-65
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Paix_secur_int.2018.i6.03
48
terrorisme. Il évalue, particulièrement, dans quels cas les États ont interprété d’une manière exten-
sive la prohibition de l’emploi de la force, le droit de légitime défense et si les normes internatio-
nales pourraient évoluer pour permettre un réponse plus effective face au terrorisme.
MOT CLÉ: Emploi de la force, terrorisme, légitime défense.
I. INTRODUCTION
The prohibition on the use of force, included in article 2.4 of the Charter
of the United Nations, was conceived in 1945 as a solution to tackle State
abuses and ensure international stability. More than seventy years later, the
incursion of new actors, and conf‌l icts and threats of an entirely different
nature to those at that time have outgrown the Charter’s provisions.
The prohibition on the use of force only allows for two exceptions:
f‌i rstly, the Security Council may carry out armed actions in accordance with
chapter VII of the Charter, and with agreement from the majority of its
members (including, of course, permanent members); secondly, the States
may also do so, but only in the exercise of their right to self-defence (article
51). In this way, the Charter provides that States may only breach the article
2.4 prohibition under very specif‌i c circumstances (self-defence), although the
truth is that the boundaries have been overstepped on many occasions. Spe-
cif‌i cally, this has occurred when States have wanted to take a stand against
international terrorism and considered that the collective security system the
Security Council is responsible for did not ensure their security. Up to what
point does current International Law allow a response to the international
terrorism threat that uses force? Does its gravity justify a more f‌l exible inter-
pretation of the prohibition? Is it possible to allege self-defence as a response
to terrorist attacks?
The following pages will address these questions, in an attempt to clarify
what choices are permissible within the framework of the current internatio-
nal legal system, the existing loopholes and the possibility that some of the
regulations are evolving to allow a better defence against terrorism.
II. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FORCE AND THE INSURGENCE OF INTERNATIO-
NAL TERRORISM: FIRST RESPONSES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
The main innovation in the Charter of the United Nations was the prohi-
bition on the use or the threat of use of force under its article 2.4, which, as

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT