The Definition of Aggression

Abstract

A COMMITTEE of the United Nations decided in April 1959 to postpone until 1962 further consideration of the question of determining when it shall be appropriate for the General Assembly to consider again the question of defining aggression. 1 This procedural decision acknowledged another defeat in the long quest for a definition of so graphically described in Professor Julius Stone's new book, Aggression and World Order.2 As long as wars were not prohibited by international law, a definition of the term was of minor importance.3 But wshen certain types of became prohibited by the Covenant of the League of Nations and the Briand-Kellogg Pact, the need for a definition of became urgent.4 The effort to find such a definition centered, however, not on the notion of war, but on aggressive or aggression, on the one hand, and war of self-defense or legitimate self-defense, on the other hand. Although much has been written on these subjects,5 Professor Stone's book is an important contribution to the clarification of the many issues involved in this acrimonious controversy. WVith his accustomed vigor, Professor Stone makes a microscopic examination of almost all the definitions proposed by governments and learned writers and comes to the conclusion that a definition of aggression is not feasible for technical, political, and moral reasons. This conclusion does not