Berenika Drazewska’s book offers a comprehensive scholarly analysis of the current meaning of military necessity in the international legal framework for the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflicts.

States invariably justify using force extraterritorially by reference to their right of self-defence. In doing so, they accept that the exercise of this right is conditioned by the customary international law requirements of necessity and proportionality. However, these requirements are notorious for being normatively indeterminate and operationally complex. As a breach of either requirement renders ostensibly defensive action unlawful, increased determinacy regarding their scope and substance is crucial to how international law constrains military force. This book examines the conceptual meaning, content, and practical application of necessity and proportionality as they relate to the right of self-defence following the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. It provides a coherent and up-to-date description of the applicable contemporary international law and proposes an analytical framework to guide its operation and appraisal. This book argues that necessity and proportionality are conceptually distinct and must be applied in the foregoing order to avoid an insufficient 'catch-all' description of legality or illegality. Necessity determines whether defensive force may be used to respond to an armed attack and where it must be directed. Proportionality governs how much total force is permissible and prohibits excessive responses. Both requirements are shown to apply on an ongoing basis throughout the duration of an armed conflict prompted by self-defence. Compliance with necessity and proportionality ensures that the purposes of self-defence are met, and nothing more, and that defensive force is not unduly disruptive to third party interests and to international peace and security.

Necessity is a notoriously dangerous and slippery concept-dangerous because it contemplates virtually unrestrained killing in warfare and slippery when used in conflicting ways in different areas of international law. Jens David Ohlin and Larry May untangle these confusing strands and perform a descriptive mapping of the ways that necessity operates in legal and philosophical arguments in jus ad bellum, jus in bello, human rights, and criminal law. Although the term "necessity" is ever-present in discussions regarding the law and ethics of killing, its meaning changes subtly depending on the context. It is sometimes an exception, at other times a constraint on government action, and most frequently a broad license in war that countenances the wholesale killing of enemy soldiers in battle. Is this legal status quo in war morally acceptable? Ohlin and May offer a normative and philosophical critique of international law's prevailing notion of jus in bello necessity and suggest ways that killing in warfare could be made more humane-not just against civilians but soldiers as well. Along the way, the authors apply their analysis to modern asymmetric conflicts with non-state actors and the military techniques most likely to be used against them. Presenting a rich tapestry of arguments from both contemporary and historical Just War theory, Necessity in International Law is the first full-length study of necessity as a legal and philosophical concept in international affairs.

"Necessity and proportionality occupy a firm place in the international law governing the use of force by states. Perhaps most importantly for practical purposes, the exercise of the right of self-defense, as recognized in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, is subject to the requirements of necessity and proportionality, as the International Court of Justice determined in the Nicaragua case. Necessity and proportionality are also firmly anchored in the international law governing armed conflicts. In its Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice even referred to one articulation of the idea of necessity, that directed against the causing of unnecessary suffering, as one of two "cardinal principles" of this body of law. However, beyond statement in such general terms, the realms of uncertainty and controversy soon begin. It is far from clear, for example, how to distinguish with precision between necessity and proportionality in the international law on self-defense and, in immediate connection herewith, what it means precisely to say that forcible action taken in the exercise of self-defense must be proportionate. It is all the less clear what legal significance, if any, necessity and proportionality possess in other contexts of the international law governing the use of force"--

Unveiling the complex dynamic between State sovereignty and necessity doctrine as historically practiced in international political relations, this book proposes analytical criteria to assess the lawfulness and legitimacy of interpretations of necessity and national emergency clauses in specialized treaty regimes.

International investment law is a subject of growing importance and complexity. Anyone interested in international investment law will appreciate the comprehensive, thoughtful and detailed exploration of this area which this distinguished group of German scholars have provided.

There has been considerable debate in the international community as to the legality of the forceful actions in Kosovo in 1999, Afghanistan in 2002 and Iraq in 2003 under the United Nations Charter. There has been consensus, however, that the use of force in all these situations had to be both proportional and necessary. Against the background of these recent armed conflicts, this 2004 book offers the first comprehensive assessment of the twin requirements of proportionality and necessity as legal restraints on the forceful actions of States. It also provides a much-needed examination of the relationship between proportionality in the law on the use of force and international humanitarian law.

The book focuses on the substantive protections accorded to investors and investments and on the variations among jurisdictions. Among the many specific issues and topics that arise in the course of the discussion are the following: - problems of transparency and conflict of interest; - the recent growth in IIAs between and among developing nations; - the effect of new model bilateral investment treaties (BITs); - the ability of non-disputing parties to participate in investor-state arbitration; - theories of the interaction of foreign direct investment (FDI) and BITs; - investor-state arbitration as an evasion of public regulatory authority; - the role of investment funds in international investment; - 'fork in the road' provisions; and - institutional versus ad hoc arbitration. International business and other investors will greatly appreciate the in-depth information and insightful guidance in this solidly useful book. It will also be welcomed by jurists and students as a significant milestone in the development of principles in a quickly growing field of practice that is still plagued with inconsistencies.

The second half of the twentieth century saw the emergence of international economic law as a major force in the international legal system. This force has been severely tested by the economic crisis of 2008. Unable to prevent the crisis, the existing legal mechanisms have struggled to react against its direst consequences. This book brings together leading experts to analyse the main causes of the crisis and the role that international economic law has played in trying to prevent it, on the one hand, and worsening it, on the other. The work highlights the reaction and examines the tools that have been created by the international legal field to implement international cooperation in an effort to help put an end to the crisis and avoid similar events in the future. The volume brings together eminent legal academics and economists to examine key issues from the perspectives of trade law, financial law, and investment law with the collective aim of reform of international economic governance.

Developments within various sub-fields of international law influence international investment law, but changes in investment law also have an impact on the evolution of other fields within international law. Through contributions from leading scholars and practitioners, this book analyses specific links between investment law and other sub-fields of international law such as the law on armed conflict, human rights, sustainable development, trade, development and EU law. In particular, this book scrutinises how concepts, principles and rules developed in the context of such sub-fields could inform the content of investment law. Solutions aimed at resolving problems in other settings may provide instructive examples for addressing current problems in the field of investment law, and vice versa. The underlying question is whether key sub-fields of public international law, notably international investment law, are open to cross-fertilisation, or, whether they are evolving further into self-contained regimes.