The horrendous attack on 9/11 led the rest of the world in great dilemma apart from an unexpected tremor .This incident gave rise to many assumptions and conclusions. There raised a number of questions regarding the genuine nature of Article 51 of International Law on self defense .In the light of this, let us discuss the aspect of International Law on self defense and also the views of Security Council after the claims made by US on 9/11 attack .
Terrorism in all its aspects is a criminal act under International Law.
Art.51 says that "Nothing in the present charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security." Let us examine some cases which define the international Law standard for whether a particular use of force is self defense.
American ship, The Caroline in a US port; because the Caroline had been used in American raids into Canadian territory. The British claimed the attack was a self defense. But the dispute was resolved in favor of Americans.
This particular case had given a clear meaning to the term self defense under International Law as "there must be a necessity of self defense- instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and no choice of means and no moment for deliberation." The means of self defense must involve nothing unreasonable or excessive: Since the act, justified by the necessity of self defense, must be limited by that necessity, and kept clearly within it. This has been accepted rule in International Law. This is some what called as "anticipatory Self defense".
The representive of Nicaragua Vs The United states of America ...
Cite this document
(“International Law and Terrorism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/politics/272246-international-law-and-terrorism
(International Law and Terrorism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 Words)
“International Law and Terrorism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/politics/272246-international-law-and-terrorism.
Section 1 of the Prevention of terrorism Act of 2005 defines terrorism as the threat of action, whereby the actions involves the use of violence against other people, serious property damage or creates a serious risk of healthy and safety of the public. The UK terrorism intelligence gathering uses sophisticated methods that are geared at breaking down the terrorist network before they commit the attacks.
States build fortresses to defend themselves from marching legions. With the same motive of self-preservation, states also forge alliances to help them ward off potential invaders. Fast forward to the 21st century, sovereign states are no longer threatened by wars waged by an invading enemy.
Undoubtedly, terrorism is wrong because it promotes violence, targets innocent civilians, and justifies the use of violence based on religion. One of the foremost problems concerning terrorism is the fact that it promotes violence. Violence is never an answer to any issue and is against the morals of humanity.
Terrorist will run counter to democratic institutions and that civil freedom which is one characteristic of a democratic nation makes the nation to be more vulnerable to terrorism.
Domestic terrorism and international terrorism have common ties whereby their activities are similar, they are common in the activities they involve in order to get finances, they both will involve in activities such as drug trafficking, counterfeiting and smuggling of goods.
It is important for every State to protect its territory, buildings, property and more importantly, its citizens. So, it is important to know the self-defence and legal options that the States possess who suffer such a terrorist attack.
Article 51 of UN Charter provides the right to self-defence whenever there is an attack on the State and thus, despite terrorism being of very recent origin, it cannot be presumed that the States do not have any self-defence at all against an attack.
As the case in Italy illustrates, limits both should be and are being placed on some of the more extreme actions being taken within the "War on Terror".
A number of legal points are raised by this case. First, the position of the United States in its actions vis-a-vis the suspected terrorist.
Terrorism has been used widely to destabilize governments, to make them acquiesce to one's demands and to create an aura of panic and chaos. It has been used as an instrument to further political objectives. Other than this there have been cases where the government has used terrorism to spread fear in its inhabitants and therefore curtail rebellions and uprisings.
'As a matter of fact all the three of them have been conferred the Nobel Peace Prize.' (Weiss, pp. 11+, 2002)
Then how can one define terrorism If truth be told, terrorism, a word on everyone's lips, though pretty easy to talk about, but is duly intricate to define.