The question then goes on to ask if there is a difference in the national and international repercussions for a state embarking upon the use of armed force or the divide is merely an arbitrary one .After definitions and analysis the essay then discusses the application or rejection of these laws in the light of recent and historical events.
From the perspective of international law the sovereignty of the states confers upon them a right to conduct their affairs free from the interference from other states.This is also known as the doctrine of non-intervention in the sovereign affairs of the other states. In Nicaragua v United States1( The existence in the opinio juris of states of the practice of non-intervention is backed by established practice.It has moreover been presented as a corollary of the principle of the sovereign equality of the states.
"dictatorial interference by a state in the affairs of another state for the purpose of maintaining or altering the actual condition of things .Intervention can take place in the external as well as the internal affairs of a state.But it must be emphasised that intervention proper is always dictatorial interference not interference pure and simple" 2
In the modern international scenario, the mention of intervention has become synonymous with armed conflict. In the Corfu Channel Case(Merits)1949 ICJ Rep 4 it was said by the court that,
"the court can only regard the alleged right of intervention as the manifestation of a policy of force such as has in the past given rise to most serious abuses and such as cannot whatever be the present defects in international organisationfind a place in international law ."
It should also be noted that before the First World War there was not much of an international effort to regulate and prevent armed conflict involving war crimes and aggression. This has been noted by an eminent academic as follows,
"International law has no alternative but to accept war independently of the justice of its origins as a relation which the parties to it may set up if they choose and to busy itself in regulating the effects of the relation"3
However the Post World War II era has seen a heightened concern by various international organisations to prevent armed conflict. In the recent decades the principle of non interference has been reinforced by the General Assembly Resolution 2131 (XX) of December 14 1960, The Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic affairs of States, General Assembly Declaration On the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among the States In Accordance with The Charter of the United Nations,GA,Resolution,"2625(XXV) of 24 October 1970.4
The legality of Aggression
Of particular importance is the way the International Law treats War of Aggression.Customary international law makes it an international offence to wage a war of