Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force

Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case

Constantinos Yiallourides, Zeray Yihdego

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

On 19 December 2005, in its partial award, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission found that Eritrea had acted in violation of the rules of international law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) in resorting to armed force to attack and occupy the disputed border town of Badme and surrounding areas, which were then under the peaceful administration of Ethiopia. In its award, the Claims Commission made a number of important findings which, taken with the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s 2002 decision on boundary delimitation, contribute towards informing and clarifying the substance of international law applicable to disputed territories and the legal obligations of states acting in those areas, especially where the use of force is engaged. This article examines the Claims Commission’s jus ad bellum award and concentrates on three key issues: a) the legality in international law of the resort to force as a means of gaining control over territory to which a state has (or believes that it has) a valid sovereignty title; b) the specific contours of self-defence in relation to territorial sovereignty claims, and c) the legitimacy of dealing with use of force issues by arbitral tribunals. In September 2018, the leaders of the two countries signed a peace and friendship agreement, thus, setting course for a new era of peace and cooperation. The lessons that ought to be learnt by these two neighbouring countries and other states have been articulated as concluding remarks.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationEthiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018
PublisherSpringer
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 23 Jan 2019

Publication series

NameEthiopian Yearbook of International Law
PublisherSpringer
Volume3
ISSN (Print)2522-5286

Fingerprint

Eritrea
Ethiopia
international law
Law
peace
territorial sovereignty
self-defense
delimitation
neighboring countries
legality
friendship
sovereignty
military
obligation
legitimacy
town
leader

Cite this

Yiallourides, C., & Yihdego, Z. (Accepted/In press). Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force: Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case. In Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018 (Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law; Vol. 3). Springer .

Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force : Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case. / Yiallourides, Constantinos; Yihdego, Zeray.

Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018. Springer , 2019. (Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law; Vol. 3).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Yiallourides, C & Yihdego, Z 2019, Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force: Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case. in Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018. Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law, vol. 3, Springer .
Yiallourides C, Yihdego Z. Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force: Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case. In Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018. Springer . 2019. (Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law).
Yiallourides, Constantinos ; Yihdego, Zeray. / Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force : Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case. Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018. Springer , 2019. (Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law).
@inbook{fd50c6af60524992a565d0bf3a731e06,
title = "Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force: Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case",
abstract = "On 19 December 2005, in its partial award, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission found that Eritrea had acted in violation of the rules of international law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) in resorting to armed force to attack and occupy the disputed border town of Badme and surrounding areas, which were then under the peaceful administration of Ethiopia. In its award, the Claims Commission made a number of important findings which, taken with the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s 2002 decision on boundary delimitation, contribute towards informing and clarifying the substance of international law applicable to disputed territories and the legal obligations of states acting in those areas, especially where the use of force is engaged. This article examines the Claims Commission’s jus ad bellum award and concentrates on three key issues: a) the legality in international law of the resort to force as a means of gaining control over territory to which a state has (or believes that it has) a valid sovereignty title; b) the specific contours of self-defence in relation to territorial sovereignty claims, and c) the legitimacy of dealing with use of force issues by arbitral tribunals. In September 2018, the leaders of the two countries signed a peace and friendship agreement, thus, setting course for a new era of peace and cooperation. The lessons that ought to be learnt by these two neighbouring countries and other states have been articulated as concluding remarks.",
author = "Constantinos Yiallourides and Zeray Yihdego",
note = "With thanks to Olivia Kirkbride, Research Volunteer in Public International Law, British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL). Any errors or omissions remain the authors’ own.",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "23",
language = "English",
series = "Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law",
publisher = "Springer",
booktitle = "Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Disputed Territories and the Law on the Use of Force

T2 - Lessons from the Eritrea-Ethiopia Case

AU - Yiallourides, Constantinos

AU - Yihdego, Zeray

N1 - With thanks to Olivia Kirkbride, Research Volunteer in Public International Law, British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL). Any errors or omissions remain the authors’ own.

PY - 2019/1/23

Y1 - 2019/1/23

N2 - On 19 December 2005, in its partial award, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission found that Eritrea had acted in violation of the rules of international law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) in resorting to armed force to attack and occupy the disputed border town of Badme and surrounding areas, which were then under the peaceful administration of Ethiopia. In its award, the Claims Commission made a number of important findings which, taken with the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s 2002 decision on boundary delimitation, contribute towards informing and clarifying the substance of international law applicable to disputed territories and the legal obligations of states acting in those areas, especially where the use of force is engaged. This article examines the Claims Commission’s jus ad bellum award and concentrates on three key issues: a) the legality in international law of the resort to force as a means of gaining control over territory to which a state has (or believes that it has) a valid sovereignty title; b) the specific contours of self-defence in relation to territorial sovereignty claims, and c) the legitimacy of dealing with use of force issues by arbitral tribunals. In September 2018, the leaders of the two countries signed a peace and friendship agreement, thus, setting course for a new era of peace and cooperation. The lessons that ought to be learnt by these two neighbouring countries and other states have been articulated as concluding remarks.

AB - On 19 December 2005, in its partial award, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission found that Eritrea had acted in violation of the rules of international law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) in resorting to armed force to attack and occupy the disputed border town of Badme and surrounding areas, which were then under the peaceful administration of Ethiopia. In its award, the Claims Commission made a number of important findings which, taken with the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s 2002 decision on boundary delimitation, contribute towards informing and clarifying the substance of international law applicable to disputed territories and the legal obligations of states acting in those areas, especially where the use of force is engaged. This article examines the Claims Commission’s jus ad bellum award and concentrates on three key issues: a) the legality in international law of the resort to force as a means of gaining control over territory to which a state has (or believes that it has) a valid sovereignty title; b) the specific contours of self-defence in relation to territorial sovereignty claims, and c) the legitimacy of dealing with use of force issues by arbitral tribunals. In September 2018, the leaders of the two countries signed a peace and friendship agreement, thus, setting course for a new era of peace and cooperation. The lessons that ought to be learnt by these two neighbouring countries and other states have been articulated as concluding remarks.

M3 - Chapter

T3 - Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law

BT - Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law 2018

PB - Springer

ER -