The overarching theme of this article is not to revisit existing debates surrounding the application of jus ad bellum or jus in bello parameters to the "peculiarities" of outer space. Rather, this article examines the major treaties that regulate a States' military activities in outer space (including, for example, the Outer Space Treaty, Limited Test Ban Treaty, Liability Convention and, PPWT), alongside Charter norms, such as Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, to pinpoint the threshold of breach, violation and incremental militarization of outer space. With respect to the PPWT, it is important to note at this juncture that it remains a "proposal", and at best, lex ferenda. A natural consequence from this analysis will be to underscore the extent to which "toleration" of such violations by States, and the international community as a whole, has resulted in the incremental militarization of space.I feel that in the future whoever has the capability to control space will likewise possess the capability to control the surface of the earth. -General Thomas D. White, USAF Chief of Staff,

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The forcible protection of one states’ own nationals on another state’s territory is one which stretches the boundaries of the broader, inherent right of self-defence available to states under international law. Known as the ‘protection of nationals abroad’ this doctrine is one which remains, at best, highly controversial. This Article examines the lawfulness of action taken by British forces when they rescued and evacuated British nationals prior to Libya descending into civil war. It also considers the extent to which action by British forces fits within the highly controversial paradigm of ‘protection of nationals abroad’.