Dual attribution in the context of military operations

in International Organizations Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

This article considers the state of the doctrine on dual attribution in military operations. The rapidly expanding jurisprudence on cooperative military ventures has yet to coalesce around a single normative framework. The role of the ario and ars in that realm has been decidedly mixed, perhaps predictably given the inconsistency between the two codes. The most hopeful developments have come in the Netherlands, with the elaboration of a bifocal, preventive interpretation of Article 7 of the ario. However, whether that framework will resonate elsewhere is uncertain. Thus far, the concept of dual attribution itself has played an odd role. It has been affirmed repeatedly in theory, but the primary value of its theoretical possibility has been in empowering courts to hear cases they might otherwise have avoided, while failing actually to attribute conduct to two or more entities.

Sections

References

32

Dannenbaum, supra note 10, pp. 200, 207.

52

Dannenbaum, supra note 10, pp. 197–202.

56

Dannenbaum, supra note 10, pp. 221–222.

74

 See Dannenbaum, supra note 46, pp. 165–170.

76

Dannenbaum, supra note 46, p. 160.

89

Dannenbaum, supra note 22, pp. 726–727; Dannenbaum, supra note 46, pp. 158–164. This may be part of “the literature” to which the Court refers without citation (Mothers of Srebrenica v. Netherlands, supra note 83, para. 4.60).

92

Dannenbaum, supra note 46, pp. 158–164.

94

Dannenbaum, supra note 46, pp. 165–170. Cf. Cedric Ryngaert, ‘Srebrenica Continued’ (2014) 61 Netherlands International Law Review pp. 367–368 (arguing, correctly in my view, that these actions should have been attributed to the Netherlands, but questioning whether they could have been attributed to the un).

115

Dannenbaum, supra note 46, pp. 158–170.

131

Dannenbaum, supra note 10.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 16 16 14
Full Text Views 6 6 6
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0