| Summary: | The United Nations Charter's use of force paradigm prohibits all uses of force by states except in respect of self-defence or when authorised by the Security Council. However, in 1999, NATO, without express authorisation from the Security Council, undertook non-defensive military action against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in response to the ongoing crisis in Kosovo. Then, in March 2003, the United States led a coalition of states in a war against Iraq. This military action was also not expressly authorised by the Security Council. Both of these uses of force are ~neral1y considered to constitute primafacie breaches of the Charter's use of force paradigm. These breaches of the Charter have led some observers to claim that the ..:f Charter's use of force paradigm is now 'dead'. It is argued that the invasion of Iraq by the United States-led coalition represents a fmal assault on the Charter's use of force rules. These spectacular breaches of the Charter demonstrate that states no longer consider the Charter's use of force paradigm to be authoritative and controlling. Thereby, the Charter's use of force paradigm is no longer valid. Through the prism ofKosovo and Iraq, this thesis examines the question of :he impact of breaches of the Charter's use of force paradigm upon its :ontinued validity. It is posited that although the Charter's use of force rules lave been breached, these breaches do not mean that the Charter's use of orce paradigm is repudiated by states and thereby no longer valid. It is ontended that in spite of these breaches the Charter's use of force laradigm remains authoritative.
|
|---|
