Tadashi Mori, Ph.D. (2008), the University of Tokyo, Japan, is Professor of International Law at that university. He has published many articles on the right of self-defence in international law and has received awards including Japan Academy Medal.

• ContentsPreface List of Abbreviations Introduction Part 1Re-formation of Perspectives1 Framework of the Conventional Debate A Bowett: Three Issues and One General Statement B Brownlie: Re-formulation of Bowett’s General Statement C Beyond the Framework of Debate Set by Brownlie 1 Influence of this Framework over Current Arguments 2 Beyond the Consensus Framework 2 Great Confusion over the Right of Self-Defence: The Caroline IncidentRevisited A Divisions over the Caroline Incident B Background to the Divisions: The Necessity Doctrine and theSelf-Defence Doctrine 1 Necessity Doctrine 2 Self-Defence Doctrine 3 Difference in the Function of the Right of Self-Defence C Differences in the Concepts: Self-preservation Doctrine 1 Self-preservation Doctrine 2 Limits of the Self-preservation Doctrine D Perspectives Part 2Two Distinct Concepts3 The Right of Self-Defence before World War i A State Practice 1 Justification for the Violation of the Territory of Another State2 Justification for the Violation of the Flag-State Jurisdiction ofAnother State B Doctrine 1 Mid-19th Century 2 Late-19th Century and Later C Policing Concept of the Right of Self-Defence 4 The Right of Self-Defence as it Developed in the Inter-war PeriodA The Basic Function of Self-Defence: Resistance to Acts ofAggression 1 The Covenant of the League of Nations (1919) 2 The Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes(1924) 3 Rhineland Pact (Locarno Treaties) (1925) 4 The Pact of Paris (1928) 5 Summary of Section A B Scope of the Inter-war Right 1 The Problem of Defining Aggression 2 The Existence of Limits: League of Nations Practice 1103 Vague Boundaries 4 Precursor of Collective Self-Defence, and the Preconditions for ItsOperation C Significance of the Inter-war Period’s Conception of Self-Defence:Self-Defence as Defensive WarPart 3The Pre-1945 Right of Self-Defence5 The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence 141A Coexistence of the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence1 The Pact of Paris and Protection of Nationals Abroad2 The League of Nations Codification Conference 3 The US-Mexico Mixed Claims CommissionB The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence1 The Right of Self-Defence in Customary International Law andTreaty Law 2 Violations of Territory and Resort to War 3 From Outlawry of War to Prohibition of the Use of Force C ‘Outlawry of War’ and the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence 6 The Right of Self-Defence in the Travaux Préparatoires of the UnitedNations Charter A Formulation of the Non-use of Force Principle1 The Formulation Process 2 From the Moscow Declaration to the Dumbarton OaksProposals 3 Deliberations at the San Francisco Conference4 Conclusions of Section AB The Perception of the Right of Self-Defence as PolicingMeasures1 Internal Discussions of the us Department of State2 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco3 Theoretical Status of the Policing Conception of Self-DefenceC ‘Insertion’ of the Right of Self-Defence as Defensive War1 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco: The Two Contexts inWhich the Right of Self-Defence was Discussed 2 The Birth of Article 51 3 Collective Self-Defence against Armed Attack and IndividualSelf-Defence against AggressionD The Meaning of the Right of Self-Defence in the Drafting Process ofthe un CharterConclusionBibliographyIndex

Tadashi Mori, Ph.D. (2008), the University of Tokyo, Japan, is Professor of International Law at that university. He has published many articles on the right of self-defence in international law and has received awards including Japan Academy Medal.

• ContentsPreface List of Abbreviations Introduction Part 1Re-formation of Perspectives1 Framework of the Conventional Debate A Bowett: Three Issues and One General Statement B Brownlie: Re-formulation of Bowett’s General Statement C Beyond the Framework of Debate Set by Brownlie 1 Influence of this Framework over Current Arguments 2 Beyond the Consensus Framework 2 Great Confusion over the Right of Self-Defence: The Caroline IncidentRevisited A Divisions over the Caroline Incident B Background to the Divisions: The Necessity Doctrine and theSelf-Defence Doctrine 1 Necessity Doctrine 2 Self-Defence Doctrine 3 Difference in the Function of the Right of Self-Defence C Differences in the Concepts: Self-preservation Doctrine 1 Self-preservation Doctrine 2 Limits of the Self-preservation Doctrine D Perspectives Part 2Two Distinct Concepts3 The Right of Self-Defence before World War i A State Practice 1 Justification for the Violation of the Territory of Another State2 Justification for the Violation of the Flag-State Jurisdiction ofAnother State B Doctrine 1 Mid-19th Century 2 Late-19th Century and Later C Policing Concept of the Right of Self-Defence 4 The Right of Self-Defence as it Developed in the Inter-war PeriodA The Basic Function of Self-Defence: Resistance to Acts ofAggression 1 The Covenant of the League of Nations (1919) 2 The Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes(1924) 3 Rhineland Pact (Locarno Treaties) (1925) 4 The Pact of Paris (1928) 5 Summary of Section A B Scope of the Inter-war Right 1 The Problem of Defining Aggression 2 The Existence of Limits: League of Nations Practice 1103 Vague Boundaries 4 Precursor of Collective Self-Defence, and the Preconditions for ItsOperation C Significance of the Inter-war Period’s Conception of Self-Defence:Self-Defence as Defensive WarPart 3The Pre-1945 Right of Self-Defence5 The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence 141A Coexistence of the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence1 The Pact of Paris and Protection of Nationals Abroad2 The League of Nations Codification Conference 3 The US-Mexico Mixed Claims CommissionB The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence1 The Right of Self-Defence in Customary International Law andTreaty Law 2 Violations of Territory and Resort to War 3 From Outlawry of War to Prohibition of the Use of Force C ‘Outlawry of War’ and the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence 6 The Right of Self-Defence in the Travaux Préparatoires of the UnitedNations Charter A Formulation of the Non-use of Force Principle1 The Formulation Process 2 From the Moscow Declaration to the Dumbarton OaksProposals 3 Deliberations at the San Francisco Conference4 Conclusions of Section AB The Perception of the Right of Self-Defence as PolicingMeasures1 Internal Discussions of the us Department of State2 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco3 Theoretical Status of the Policing Conception of Self-DefenceC ‘Insertion’ of the Right of Self-Defence as Defensive War1 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco: The Two Contexts inWhich the Right of Self-Defence was Discussed 2 The Birth of Article 51 3 Collective Self-Defence against Armed Attack and IndividualSelf-Defence against AggressionD The Meaning of the Right of Self-Defence in the Drafting Process ofthe un CharterConclusionBibliographyIndex

Tadashi Mori, Ph.D. (2008), the University of Tokyo, Japan, is Professor of International Law at that university. He has published many articles on the right of self-defence in international law and has received awards including Japan Academy Medal.

• ContentsPreface List of Abbreviations Introduction Part 1Re-formation of Perspectives1 Framework of the Conventional Debate A Bowett: Three Issues and One General Statement B Brownlie: Re-formulation of Bowett’s General Statement C Beyond the Framework of Debate Set by Brownlie 1 Influence of this Framework over Current Arguments 2 Beyond the Consensus Framework 2 Great Confusion over the Right of Self-Defence: The Caroline IncidentRevisited A Divisions over the Caroline Incident B Background to the Divisions: The Necessity Doctrine and theSelf-Defence Doctrine 1 Necessity Doctrine 2 Self-Defence Doctrine 3 Difference in the Function of the Right of Self-Defence C Differences in the Concepts: Self-preservation Doctrine 1 Self-preservation Doctrine 2 Limits of the Self-preservation Doctrine D Perspectives Part 2Two Distinct Concepts3 The Right of Self-Defence before World War i A State Practice 1 Justification for the Violation of the Territory of Another State2 Justification for the Violation of the Flag-State Jurisdiction ofAnother State B Doctrine 1 Mid-19th Century 2 Late-19th Century and Later C Policing Concept of the Right of Self-Defence 4 The Right of Self-Defence as it Developed in the Inter-war PeriodA The Basic Function of Self-Defence: Resistance to Acts ofAggression 1 The Covenant of the League of Nations (1919) 2 The Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes(1924) 3 Rhineland Pact (Locarno Treaties) (1925) 4 The Pact of Paris (1928) 5 Summary of Section A B Scope of the Inter-war Right 1 The Problem of Defining Aggression 2 The Existence of Limits: League of Nations Practice 1103 Vague Boundaries 4 Precursor of Collective Self-Defence, and the Preconditions for ItsOperation C Significance of the Inter-war Period’s Conception of Self-Defence:Self-Defence as Defensive WarPart 3The Pre-1945 Right of Self-Defence5 The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence 141A Coexistence of the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence1 The Pact of Paris and Protection of Nationals Abroad2 The League of Nations Codification Conference 3 The US-Mexico Mixed Claims CommissionB The Relationship between the Two Conceptions of Self-Defence1 The Right of Self-Defence in Customary International Law andTreaty Law 2 Violations of Territory and Resort to War 3 From Outlawry of War to Prohibition of the Use of Force C ‘Outlawry of War’ and the Two Conceptions of the Right ofSelf-Defence 6 The Right of Self-Defence in the Travaux Préparatoires of the UnitedNations Charter A Formulation of the Non-use of Force Principle1 The Formulation Process 2 From the Moscow Declaration to the Dumbarton OaksProposals 3 Deliberations at the San Francisco Conference4 Conclusions of Section AB The Perception of the Right of Self-Defence as PolicingMeasures1 Internal Discussions of the us Department of State2 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco3 Theoretical Status of the Policing Conception of Self-DefenceC ‘Insertion’ of the Right of Self-Defence as Defensive War1 From Dumbarton Oaks to San Francisco: The Two Contexts inWhich the Right of Self-Defence was Discussed 2 The Birth of Article 51 3 Collective Self-Defence against Armed Attack and IndividualSelf-Defence against AggressionD The Meaning of the Right of Self-Defence in the Drafting Process ofthe un CharterConclusionBibliographyIndex