2018-01-21
154
Rantania is incriminated the violation of the territorial integrity of Aprophe by using military force, which should be considered as an act of aggression. Rantanian air strikes meet the definition of an act of aggression given in the Definition of Aggression United Nations General Assembly Resolution. And air strikes in the context of Operation Uniting for Democracy should be classified as bombardment by the armed forces of a Rantania against the territory of Aprophe which like the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State is interpreted as an aggression accordingly the Definition of Aggression Resolution[41].
These air strikes may not be justified with Rantanian non-recognition of the Andler government rightfulness. In particular the Tinoco arbitration stated that non-recognition of any State government “does not provide an excuse for a use of force” against that State[42]. Therefore, Rantania is the aggressor State in this situation. Furthermore, air attacks amount to an unlawful use of force since the only legitimate excuse for the use of force (except the one authorized by the Security Council) is self-defense. But it is obvious that Respondent cannot justify its incursion with the right of self-defense whereas under the article 51 of the UN Charter an armed attack is the sine qua non for the exercise the right of self-defense. And Aprophe never committed acts which may be classified as the use of force against Rantania. Thus there is every indication that Rantanian air attacks unlawful.
