Abstract
The recent policies of the United States Administration threaten the entire structure of international law. Widespread concern in the US and elsewhere has been expressed in a different cluster of principles, in particular in the report of the Canadian‐based Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. Its report states that the primary responsibility of a state is to protect its citizens; such protection includes prevention, reaction and rebuilding. The implications of this for military intervention are discussed; this must be a last resort after all non‐military options have failed in response to the actual or probable large‐scale loss of life and the objective to prevent further suffering. The action must be authorized by the United Nations Security Council or, if this fails to respond, the General Assembly. A further commission should examine how the international community should respond to states that refuse to comply with international law regarding weapons of mass destruction.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
