An attack on Iran: the legal basis, or lack thereof
Garwood-Gowers, Andrew (2012) An attack on Iran: the legal basis, or lack thereof. The Conversation.
Talk of a possible Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities has re-ignited debate over the right of self-defence under international law.
Some academics, including Anthony D'Amato and Alan Dershowitz, have claimed that an attack on Iran would be a permissible act of self-defence. Others, such as Kevin Jon Heller, argue that such action would be a clear breach of international law.
So, who is correct? Would military action against Iran be legal or illegal?
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||self-defence, pre-emptive anticipatory action, nuclear weapons, Iran, Israel|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > International Law (excl. International Trade Law) (180116)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
Current > Schools > School of Law
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2012 The Conversation Media Group|
|Deposited On:||27 Apr 2012 08:17|
|Last Modified:||27 Apr 2012 08:17|
Repository Staff Only: item control page