지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Recently, there have been numerous cases of states using force against non-state actors outside their territory because non-state actors have come to exert an increased influence in the international security field. It is unlikely that actions of this kind will cease in near future. The problem is that international law is uncertain about regulation of use of force or armed conflict between state and non-state actor. The detailed issues are whether extraterritorial forcible measures against non-state actor can be justified as self-defense under international law and whether international humanitarian law can be applied when armed conflict between state and non-state actor takes place transnationally. This article suggests that a significant change has been made to the ``jus ad bellum``. When several states invoked self-defense against non-state actors, other states almost never explicitly contended that the attacked state was barred from self-defense against non-state actor based upon the lack of statehood of the attacker. This implies that the concept of self-defence as a result of armed attack by non-state actor has been recognized by states. Moreover, applicability of self-defense against non-state actor has received increasing support among scholars in recent years. However, it must be noted that the parameters of self-defense in this context remain to be established more clearly, especially considering the operation against non-state actor is taken on the territory of another state. On the other hand, there has been much reluctance to change the ``jus in bello``. Armed conflict between state and transnational non-state actor not operating within the confines of one country displays characteristics different from the traditional international armed conflict or non-international armed conflict. Nevertheless, efforts to overcome this difficulty have been made primarily under the existing framework of international humanitarian law. The main result of such approach is the application of only minimum humanitarian norm, which is certainly insufficient. Even a number of scholars has denied the existence of armed conflict under international humanitarian law. If the ``jus ad bellum`` now enables states to use force against non-state actor, the ``jus in bello`` will also have to be adapted to this new challenge. As international legal issues posed by use of force against non-state actor indicate, the state-centered international law paradigm is not expected to function properly in the actuality of contemporary international law. This leads to the conclusion that increasingly significant role played by non-state actor needs to be firmly grasped by international legal order.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (77)
참고문헌 신청
1. [인터넷자원] - / / http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Daniel Thürem / 1999 / The “Failed State” and International Law / International Review of the Red Cross 81 : 731 ~ 732
3. [보고서] - ILC / 2001 / Commentaries on the Draft Articles, Yearbook of the International Law Commission : 47 ~ 54
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Riccardo Pisillo-Mazzeschi / 1992 / The Due Diligence Rule and the Nature of the International Responsibility of States / German Yearbook of International Law 35 : 9 ~ 22
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Greg Travalio / 2003 / Terrorism, State Responsibility, and the Use of Military Force / Chicago Journal of International Law 4 (97) : 110 ~ 111
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Daniel Thürem / 1999 / The “Failed State” and International Law / International Review of the Red Cross 81 : 731 ~ 732
3. [보고서] - ILC / 2001 / Commentaries on the Draft Articles, Yearbook of the International Law Commission : 47 ~ 54
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Riccardo Pisillo-Mazzeschi / 1992 / The Due Diligence Rule and the Nature of the International Responsibility of States / German Yearbook of International Law 35 : 9 ~ 22
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Greg Travalio / 2003 / Terrorism, State Responsibility, and the Use of Military Force / Chicago Journal of International Law 4 (97) : 110 ~ 111
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
비국제적 무력충돌 시 국제인도법의 적용
인도법논총
2012 .12
-
국제인도법상 무력충돌의 유형과 그 적용
국제법학회논총
2018 .12
-
[Current Issues] Implementation of International Humanitarian Law in Japan
인도법논총
2011 .12
-
現代武力衝突法의 規範的 特性과 實效性의 문제
외법논집
2009 .01
-
[Keynote Speech] Enhancing protection of people affected by armed conflict through implementation, clarification and development of international humanitarian law
인도법논총
2011 .12
-
[Session Ⅰ(발제강연)] Realities and Problems in Implementing International Humanitarian Law (IHL) In Contemporary Armed Conflicts
인도법논총
2006 .09
-
國際人道法의 施行
국제법학회논총
1982 .12
-
Improving Compliance with International Humanitarian Law
인도법논총
2004 .07
-
Re-Examination of The Role of Armed Forces in Space and Discipline of International Space Law : Meta-International Law Approach
한국항공우주정책·법학회지
1999 .01
-
“Respect of International Humanitarian Law and the Use of New Weapon Technology”
인도법논총
2014 .12
-
왜 비국가 행위자를 말하는가?
서울국제법연구
2010 .12
-
A Critical Study on the assertion of New Rule for New Type of War in IHL : Focused on 9.11 and Afghanistan war
국제법학회논총
2016 .09
-
武力紛爭時 兒童의 國際法的 保護
국제법학회논총
2004 .12
-
국제법상 전후법(Jus Post Bellum)에 관한 현대적 논의 : 개념과 원칙을 중심으로
국제법학회논총
2009 .12
-
[Current Issues] Implementing International Humanitarian Law in the People’s Republic of China : Achievements and Problems
인도법논총
2011 .12
-
2003년 미국 - 이라크 전쟁과 현대국제법의 과제
고려법학
2006 .01
-
[발제강연 Ⅰ] 무력충돌시 인간의 존엄보호를 위한 국제인도법의 실천
인도법논총
2005 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0