Abstract
In international law there are two long-recognized conflicts: one between self-determination and non-intervention, and the other between self-defense and non-intervention. In Sect. I, Wayne McCormack examines the first conflict in the context of informational warfare, concluding that supplying information (or misinformation) in a foreign conflict with the objective of altering the course of the conflict is within the acknowledged sovereignty rights of a state and does not violate the non-interference right of the state in conflict. In Sect. II, Deen Chatterjee examines the other conflict—that between self-defense and non-intervention. He claims that the provision of preventive war in self-defense can get unduly interventionist, especially in the context of cyber warfare, making the world less secure. To counter this prospect, Chatterjee suggests that countries should promote prevention in non-interventionist terms by relying on the soft power of diplomacy and collaboration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Nicaragua v. United States, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14.
- 2.
http://www.thelawfareproject.org/what-is-lawfare.html (last visited Oct. 14, 2013).
- 3.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/slapp_suit (last visited Oct. 14, 2013).
- 4.
The ability of an outside nation-state to come to the assistance of a rebel group traditionally depended on the fuzzy line between “insurgent” and “belligerent.” But in recent times, a debate has arisen over whether it is permissible to intervene on behalf of liberation groups (see Gray 2000, pp 45–50).
- 5.
130 S.Ct. 2705 (2010).
- 6.
18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(3).
- 7.
130 S. Ct. at 2729.
- 8.
2 U.S.C. § 441e.
- 9.
References
Buchanan, Allen, and Robert Keohane. 2004. The preventive use of force: A cosmopolitan institutional approach. Ethics and International Affairs 17 (1): 1–18.
Chatterjee, Deen. 2013a. The ethics of prventive war. Cambridge University Press.
Chatterjee, Deen. 2013b. Enough about just war, what about just peace? The doctrine of preventive non-interverntion. In The ethics of preventive war, Hrsg. Deen Chatterjee. Cambridge University Press.
Gray, Christine. 2000. International law and the use of force. 45–50. Oxford.
Crawford, Neta. 2003. The slippery slope to preventive war. Ethics and Interantional Affairs 17 (1): 35.
Doyle, Michael. 2008. Striking first: Preemption and prevention in international conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Luban, David. 2004. Preventive war. Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (3): 207–248.
Walzer, Michael. 2004. Arguing about war. New haven: Yale University Press.
Walzer, Michael. 2006. Just and unjust wars: A moral argument with historical illustrations. 4th ed. New York: Basic Books.
Myers, R. J. 1996. Notes on the just war theory: Whose justice, which wars? Ethics and International Affairs 10 (1), 115–130.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McCormack, W., Chatterjee, D. (2014). Technology, Information, and Modern Warfare: Challenges and Prospects in the 21st Century. In: Floridi, L., Taddeo, M. (eds) The Ethics of Information Warfare. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 14. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04135-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04135-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04134-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04135-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)