Courting controversy: International law, national norms and American nuclear use

Farrell, T; Lambert, H

Courting controversy: International law, national norms and American nuclear use

Farrell, T Lambert, H

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Review of International Studies, 2001, 27 (3), pp. 309 - 326
Issue Date:: 2001-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Courtingcontroversy_internati.pdf	Published Version	114.88 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Farrell, T	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Lambert, H https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1456-6219	en_US
dc.date.issued	2001-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Review of International Studies, 2001, 27 (3), pp. 309 - 326	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0260-2105	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/133407
dc.description.abstract	In July 1996, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a controversial Advisory Opinion on the legality of nuclear use (including, threat of use). The ICJ found that ’nuclear use would generally be contrary to the rules of international law’, but it failed to conclude that nuclear use would be unlawful in all circumstances. The major reason for this was because it recognized nuclear norms (that is, the practice of deterrence) to which many states adhered. Taking the American case, this article examines norms of nuclear non-use and nuclear targeting. It shows where these national norms came from, and how they came to be empowered in US policy and embodied in American practice. It is critical of the ICJ’s conclusion because, while the norm of non-use is consistent with international law, it finds American targeting norms to be contrary to humanitarian law.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Review of International Studies	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1017/S0260210501003096	en_US
dc.subject.classification	International Relations	en_US
dc.title	Courting controversy: International law, national norms and American nuclear use	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	3	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	27	en_US
utslib.for	1605 Policy and Administration	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
utslib.for	2203 Philosophy	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Law
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	3	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	27	en_US

Abstract:

In July 1996, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a controversial Advisory Opinion on the legality of nuclear use (including, threat of use). The ICJ found that ’nuclear use would generally be contrary to the rules of international law’, but it failed to conclude that nuclear use would be unlawful in all circumstances. The major reason for this was because it recognized nuclear norms (that is, the practice of deterrence) to which many states adhered. Taking the American case, this article examines norms of nuclear non-use and nuclear targeting. It shows where these national norms came from, and how they came to be empowered in US policy and embodied in American practice. It is critical of the ICJ’s conclusion because, while the norm of non-use is consistent with international law, it finds American targeting norms to be contrary to humanitarian law.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/133407