Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:14:56.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

U.S. Reaction to ICJ Judgment in Iranian Oil Platforms Case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 98 , Issue 3 , July 2004 , pp. 597 - 601
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, e.g., SC Res. 552 (June 1, 1984) (stating that “these attacks constitute a threat to the safety and stability of the area and have serious implications for international peace and security”); see also SC Res. 582 (Feb. 24, 1986); SC Res. 598 (July 20, 1987).

2 For background, see Walker, George K., The Tanker War, 1980–88: Law and Policy (U.S. Naval War College, International Law Studies No. 74, 2000)Google Scholar.

3 See Letter Dated 19 October 1987 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations Addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/19219 (Oct. 19, 1987) (invoking a right of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter).

4 See Letter Dated 18 April 1988 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations Addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/19791 (Apr. 18, 1988) (again invoking a right of self-defense).

5 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, Aug. 15, 1955, 8 UST 899, 284 UNTS 93 [hereinafter Treaty].

6 Oil Platforms (Iran. v. U.S.), Merits, paras. 32–42 (Nov. 6, 2003), 42 ILM 1334 (2003); see Bekker, Pieter, Case Report: Oil Platforms (Iran v. United States), 98 AJIL 550 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar (this issue).

7 Treaty, supra note 5, Art. XX(1) (d), 8 UST at 912, 284 UNTS at 132.

8 Oil Platforms, supra note 6, paras. 43–78.

9 Id., paras. 79–98.

10 For a complete version of the paper, see Taft, William H. IV, Self-Defense and the Oil Platforms Decision, 29 Yale J. Int’l L. 295 (2004)Google Scholar. The paper identifies the author as Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State, and contains no disclaimer that the views are personal.

11 [Editor’s Note: Oil Platforms, supra note 6, para. 51 (quoting Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Merits, 1986 ICJ Rep. 14, 101, para. 191 (June 27)).]

12 [Editor’s Note: Oil Platforms, supra note 6, para. 64.]

13 [Editor’s Note: Id., para. 72.]

14 [Editor’s Note: Military and Paramilitary Activities, supra note 11, at 101, 103, paras. 191, 195.]

15 [Editor’s Note: Oil Platforms, supra note 6, para. 76.]

16 [Editor’s Note: Id.]

17 [Editor’s Note: Id., para. 77.]

18 Taft, supra note 10, at 295, 298–304 (footnotes omitted).