The use of force by a state against foreign shipping on the high seas was traditionally seen as an act of war. The UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force for any reason, other than UN mandated operations, self-defence, and forcible humanitarian action.
The use of force by a state against foreign shipping on the high seas was traditionally seen as an act of war. The UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force for any reason, other than UN mandated operations, self-defence, and forcible humanitarian action. The UN expressly includes “the blockade of the ports or coasts of a State” in its landmark definition of aggression of 1974. At this very moment, the Kampala review conference of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court is drawing on this definition in its attempts to codify individual responsibility for the crime of aggression.
History lessons
In view of this background, Israel faces a heavy burden to demonstrate that one of the recognised exceptions to the use of force covers forcible interdiction. Maritime interception is uncontroversial where the UN Security Council has
