According to Article III of the Treaty, the prohibition of the international use of force was meant to be universal; the original signatories envisaged “adherence by all the other Powers of the world.” With the creation of the United Nations in 1945 and the eventual accession of almost all states to the organization, this objective has virtually been accomplished. [...] Why should, in a case of self-defense, the applicability of those rules be in doubt? Would the Court also have hesitated when it comes to the use of chemical or biological arms? The ICJ should have been cognizant of the fact that the principles of the Hague Conventions still apply, and in particular the provision of Article 22. [...] morality? In reality, the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Arms – as a document of moral encouragement directed at the nuclear states – does not go beyond what the General Assembly of the United Nations had already achieved by way of its Declaration of 24 November 1961 on the “prohibition of the use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons.”50 As the delegate of Tunisia, one of the sponsors. [...] That the international community, first and foremost the General Assembly of the United Nations, has repeatedly stressed jus cogens aspects concerning the illegality of the threat or the use of nuclear arms, declaring both as “contrary to the laws of humanity” and “a crime against mankind and civilization,”62 has no impact in terms of the enforceability of the existing treaties, and the least so o. [...] On the proposition of the Imperial Cabinet of Russia, the signatories of the Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 stated that “the progress of civilization should have the effect of alleviating as much as possible the calamities of war”66 – a call that preceded and inspired the development of international humanitarian law in the 20th century.
Authors
- Pages
- 16
- Published in
- Austria
