Korzhenyak A.M. —
On the prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare in the context of modern International humanitarian law and law of international security
// International Law. – 2021. – ¹ 4.
– P. 53 - 70.
DOI: 10.25136/2644-5514.2021.4.36572
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/wl/article_36572.html
Read the article
Abstract: This article analyzes the historical-legal peculiarities of establishment and evolution of international humanitarian law and its principles in the context of the general theory of international law and current political situation. Referring to the international legal documents that regulate the rules of conducting warfare and issues of international security, as well as case law, the author describes and systematizes the methods and means of conducting warfare that are classified under restraining and prohibitive regimes. The goal of this research lies in the analysis and systematization of international legal norms aimed at prevention of the use of prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare. The object of this article is the relations between the actors of international law with regards to restrained use of means and method of conducting warfare. The subject is the international conventions, international customs, general principles of law recognized by the civilized nations. The scientific novelty consists in the author’s view of the essence of relevant issues in the sphere of international humanitarian law, establishment and evolution of international humanitarian law in the context of restrained use of methods and means of conducting warfare. The author presents the original systematization and classification of the prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare. The conclusion is made that many disagreements can be solved by responsible compliance with the existing norms of the international humanitarian law that is intended to prevent potential humanitarian risks. The author reveals that the four protocols to one of the fundamental sources of the international humanitarian law – the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980) have such significant shortcoming as the absence of control mechanism for compliance with the established prohibitions.
Korzhenyak A.M. —
Prevention of armament race in outer space: the questions of biosafety and countering WMD terrorism
// International Law. – 2021. – ¹ 4.
– P. 71 - 81.
DOI: 10.25136/2644-5514.2021.4.36573
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/wl/article_36573.html
Read the article
Abstract: This article comprehensively analyzes the legal mechanisms for preventing the armament race in outer space, as well as international legal issues of ensuring biosafety. The author examines the Russian initiative in counteracting chemical and biological terrorism, which is the most promising instrument for overcoming the gaps in international law. Recommendations are made on strengthening the modern system of international agreements in area of international humanitarian law and law of international security. The object of this research is the relations between the actors of international law in the sphere of biosafety, countering chemical and biological terrorism, and prevention of the armament race in outer space. Methodological framework is comprised of the formal-legal, system-functional, normative-dogmatic, and analytical methods. The conclusion is made that due to the absence of prohibiting provisions in the existing norms of international law, the weapons that do not fall under the category of weapon of mass destruction, may theoretically appear and be applied in outer space, which would undermine the strategic stability, pose a real threat to the international peace and security, and as well as cause a “mirror” response from other key players in outer space. There is currently no alternative to the China-Russia PAROS treaty (Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space). With regards to the questions of biosafety, the participant countries of the Biological Weapons Convention must continue to advocate for the adoption of a Protocol to the Convention with the effective mechanism of verification , which is blocked by the United States, and resist the proposals of the United States to create politically motivated and subjective mechanisms that would bypass the procedures of the Biological Weapons Convention.