”Are we at war? “ State support to parties in armed conflict: consequences under jus in bello, jus ad bellum and neutrality law

Cooperation between military powers during wars is not a new phenomenon. However, due to the increased globalization and the newly available technologies, supportive acts take more complex forms and concern a wider variety of actors - both States and non-State actors. This study scrutinizes the position of supportive acts under international law. The central research question is formulated as follows: what are the possible consequences under jus in bello, jus ad bellum and neutrality law of State support to a party to an armed conflict? In order to streamline the analysis, four categories of support were identified: (i) allowing territory to be used; (ii) providing logistical support; (iii) training and (iv) crucial intelligence sharing. For each of these categories, this study investigates whether or not they would trigger the specific consequences attached to the respective thresholds under jus in bello, jus ad bellum and neutrality law. After two introductory chapters (one focusing on the general rules on State responsibility and one explaining the distinction between jus in bello and jus ad bellum), three core chapters deal with the following sub-questions:a. When does a State supporting a party to an armed conflict become party to that conflict itself?b. What are the consequences of becoming a party to an armed conflict?c. When does a State supporting an armed attack, a use of force or a violation of the principle of non-intervention commit either of these acts itself?d. What are the consequences of crossing jus ad bellum thresholds?e. When does a neutral State breaching neutrality law become party to an armed conflict?f. What are the consequences of violating the law of neutrality?The study shows that a State can become party to an armed conflict by doing less than providing kinetic assistance to parties to an armed conflict. It also reveals that assisting another State in the commission of an armed attack or a use of force may have the same consequences as carrying out those acts as a main actor. Lastly, overall, it can be concluded that each form of supporting parties to an armed conflict has its specific international legal consequences.

Publication year:2019