Global Community

The current national security complexities of the post-9/11 environment have become far more complex as opposed to the view of some which believed the end of the Cold War’s bipolar struggle would ease tensions among states. As the United States experienced a reduction in the historical threats from the Soviet Union, other states continued to experience security challenges internally and externally. Theresa Reinold’s article published during 2011 in The American Journal of International Law, examines the requirement to modernized and clarify criteria which will govern defensive state use of force against other states that are unable or unwilling to regulate the actions of irregular forces located inside their states territory.

Reinold accepts that the 21st century introduced the global community to mass terrorism during 9/11, requiring states to protect their security although rationalizing that the uncontrolled utilization of force in the name of self-defense would also establish a dangerous precedent. Key elements of Reinold’s examination are the inability and unwillingness to exert control over irregular forces within the sheltering state. States are also altering their interpretation of international norms of self-defense which historically have included the principles of immediacy of attack, the requirement of attribution to the state and the duel requirement of necessity and proportionality. The author’s objective analysis of this critical topic provides an intriguing and thoughtful study utilizing recent conflicts in Lebanon, Colombia and Pakistan. One could refer to Grotius’s writing in 1625 who foresaw these challenges, “That the possibility of being attacked confers the right to attack is abhorrent to every princ...

... middle of paper ...

...tes has led to a broader interpretation of what qualifies as just use of force under jus ad bellum. The world community was changed forever after the attacks of 9/11 and this event ushered in a reinterpretation of when one state can act after an unwillingness or inability of another state to provide security. Reinold has presented much evidence that the norms have changed. The world opinion has become relatively accepting of this shift to use force but simultaneously each situation is complex and different. The cases presented have aspects that support both positions which lead to thorny debates and this could be true for many other crises worldwide. This article presents a relevant topic that will continue to evolve and lead to much scrutiny as globalization increase and states demand that other states accept changing norms of security.