Arguments Against Preemptive Strikes

Amazing Essays
Sanctions according to the former US president Woodrow Wilson is a "peaceful, silent, [and] deadly remedy" and currently there are sanctions placed on North Korea. Critics can say that this deters North Korea from building weapons of mass destruction thus illustrating how it is not necessary to ever use preemptive strikes. The problem with this is first, sanctions placed on states that sponsor terrorism are ineffective . This is because sanctions are not used to change the mind of a foreign government, rather they are used to please the domestic outcry for action . Secondly, for terrorist groups, there are often extremist and to them, it is often a total war or a divine conflict where they are on a mission to change the world for the better …show more content…
This is because self-defense can only occur after an armed attack , since the text says 'after ' which means that a preemptive strike could never comply with section 51 . This presents a very restrictive interpretation of section 51 which is supported by the UNSC, General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, and international scholars . This is seen with the international condemnation of Israel for preemptively attacking Iraq 's nuclear factory . To further support the anti-preemptive strike stance, the International Court of Justice have also ruled that it would take a restrictive interpretation of Article 51 as seen in Nicaragua v. United States. This criticism is, however, being flawed if looking at it from a logical perspective and given a new threat that terrorist can now pose. This is because the literal interpretation of Article 51 claims that a country cannot defend itself until it suffers harm . This is extremely dangerous as it limits the state to attempt to solve the issue through nonviolent means such as negotiating, which as mentioned earlier, states will not do with terrorist. This then leaves the state defenseless to do anything until the attack occurs, which thus violates its right to defend

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Just cause is the principle that a state should only approve war in the act of self-defense against the aggressor who is always at fault (Orend 17). Drone strikes in Yemen violate this principle because just cause condemns preemptive strikes. Furthermore, an act of self-defense only qualifies when the self-defense is in response to a current attack, not a suspected attack in the future (Orend 17). Because drone strikes are used to prevent Al Qaeda’s potential, future attacks on the United States, they may seem perfectly justified; however, considering that the United States has not suffered a domestic attack on the scale of the September 11 attacks since 2001, drone strikes violate this central rule of Just War…

    • 1540 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The pacifist position argues that the use of nuclear weapons will always be morally wrong because: “1) their use will result in widespread noncombatant deaths and 2) the destructive effects of such weapons will necessarily be out of proportion to any political or military objectives achieved” (p.208). Yet, there are some objections against the pacifist position. First, an argument against the view that the proliferation of nuclear weapons it’s inevitable and will eventually escalate to nuclear war, is that since 1945 there is not a single case recorded with the use of nuclear weapons. Second, by taking this pacifist’s position…

    • 1702 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Sovereignty In North Korea

    • 1858 Words
    • 8 Pages

    However, this is not true the United States does not want to fight because they do not see the reason being fit. However, North Korea has recently been threating us with their nuclear capabilities that can supposedly reach the U.S. mainland’s. This is having an impact on the worlds international relations. International relations are the relationship between states governments and the connection to actors and social and geographical influences. Recently North Korea has released the fact that they have enough power to release a hydrogen bomb in the top of a missile.…

    • 1858 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    For example with North Korea, they do not respond to talking and threaten the United States with nuclear threats, talking with them will not work and could just result to an attack on the U.S. War is oftentimes necessary because sometimes violence is necessary, there are positives to declaring war, and it can get things done faster. A reason that war is sometimes necessary is that sometimes violence is necessary. If terrorism threatens a country, military action will most likely need to be taken (“Violence Sometimes Necessary”). If terrorism or a terrorist threaten a country, like 9/11, war may have to be the only option, because otherwise whoever is attacking your country will not stop unless you put a stop to it. The U.S probably would not…

    • 1097 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Schlosser agrees with this point but he also states that since the deterrence is psychological and not physical it could not work in the future and bring about disastrous results. For example, if India and Pakistan used their nuclear weapons on each other, more that one billion people would be killed. The next point that examined is nuclear weapons violate international law. This is true as nuclear deterrence is like holding a nation hostage. Also nuclear weapons cannot differentiate between military targets and civilians it violates the Geneva Conventions, which protect civilians.…

    • 1248 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Fred Fleitz Analysis

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Also his failed program to train Syrian rebels left and opportunity for Russia and Iran to step up. Fleitz views this as a huge weakness leaving those small deployments vulnerable for capture with no back up and an embarrassment to American credibility. The Obama administration 's actions are passive and have a peace keeping effort driving it but from a realist point of view, they are viewed as spineless and exploitable. Fleitz believes that war is unavoidable and America needs to show their strength in the Middle East so the war is not brought overseas because peace is unachievable. Fleitz also comments on Middle East allies shifting because of Obama 's “non-policy”.…

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    International law also implies that terrorism cannot be justified, as two elements, which are essentially universal tenants of the law of war, applies to war and what actions are acceptable. If it cannot be justified even during the war, how can it be justified outside of war? These elements are distinction and necessity. Distinction states that there is a difference between the combatants and non-combatants, and there are actions that cannot be used on non-combatants. The use of violence would be acceptable against soldiers, but not non-combatants.…

    • 1103 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Essay On Euphemism

    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In contrast to rebel definition, there is no universally agreed-on definition of terrorism, but one thing is agreed by all, it is immoral and has no justification. If so, why won't the media call it what it is? Terror! In this case, when reporting on a terror attack, people and more important, governments and international organizations would immediately criticize the act and would not think twice before saying it is wrong and forbidden. They will have no other choice.…

    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This document deals in detail of tensions between Kim Jung Un and the North Korean military. I recommend suppressing the document since the extent to which the tension is true remains unclear. Publishing the document will lead to unnecessary purge and violence in North Korea. Also, it can worsen the relationship between the US and North…

    • 720 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Absolutists do not believe that they should make their decisions with any consideration of context or based off of the outcome or consequences of their decision but rather if the decision they make is morally right or wrong. For example, flamethrowers were banned after World War II under protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. While it may be more effective to use a flamethrower to defeat your enemies, moral judgement deems it wrong to burn another man or woman alive. Deontologists believe this because this is a cruel way to die, it goes against moral judgement, thus it should not be done. However, these rules are flawed due to their ambiguity and various…

    • 1299 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics