Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Nato Intervention On Trial: The Legal Case That Was Never Made, Paul Williams, Michael Scharff
Nato Intervention On Trial: The Legal Case That Was Never Made, Paul Williams, Michael Scharff
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The United States and its NATO allies have defended the air strikes against Yugoslavia on moral grounds (to stop atrocities) and security grounds (to prevent the conflict from spilling over to neighboring European countries), but curiously they have never articulated a legal justification for the intervention. The nearest the NATO countries have come to articulating a legal rationale has been to cite various resolutions of the Security Council, in which the Council has determined that the actions of Yugoslavia in Kosovo constitute a threat to peace and security in the region and, pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter, …
The Incident At Cavalese And Strategic Compensation, Robert D. Sloane
The Incident At Cavalese And Strategic Compensation, Robert D. Sloane
Faculty Scholarship
In 1953, the United States ratified the NATO Status of Forces Agreement. The drafters foresaw that the presence and training of foreign military forces within and between their territories would probably, if not inevitably, cause injury to civilians, giving rise to claims that, if not settled quickly and satisfactorily, could spark incidents disruptive to their cooperation in mutual defense. To this end, the SOFA established a jurisdictional regime designed to minimize the political friction these incidents threatened to generate, by providing prompt and manifestly fair settlement procedures. This result was vital to NATO's operations, for, in democratic host states, popular …
Benign Hegemony? Kosovo And Article 2(4) Of The U.N. Charter, Jules Lobel
Benign Hegemony? Kosovo And Article 2(4) Of The U.N. Charter, Jules Lobel
Articles
The 1999 U.S.-led, NATO-assisted air strike against Yugoslavia has been extolled by some as leading to the creation of a new rule of international law permitting nations to undertake forceful humanitarian intervention where the Security Council cannot act. This view posits the United States as a benevolent hegemon militarily intervening in certain circumstances in defense of such universal values as the protection of human rights. This article challenges that view. NATO's Kosovo intervention does not represent a benign hegemony introducing a new rule of international law. Rather, the United States, freed from Cold War competition with a rival superpower, is …