Stephan Wittich

The Use of Force, Self-defence and the Unrealism in International Law

Ten years ago, a polemic article in an Austrian daily newspaper stirred up a lively debate on the stance of international lawyers in Austria towards the use of force in international law and on the way how they justifi ed – or, more precisely, how they attempted to justify – the military intervention in Kosovo by several NATO member states. The article accused – much in the style of a ‘Chuck Norris roundhouse kick’ – Austrian international lawyers of warping international justice by advancing various justifi cations for the breach of the prohibition to use force in the context of the armed intervention in Kosovo. This sweeping blow, which was full of ridiculous assertions and pseudo-legal arguments, eventually turned out to be a hoax by a hitherto unidentifi ed author. But given its extremely polemic undertone it prompted Professor Zemanek, as its main target, to step into the breach for international lawyers, even for those with whose views he would never agree. And by this article and the outcry it had caused – particularly on the part of domestic lawyers who are notoriously critical towards international law and who doubt its nature as a ‘real’ legal order – Professor Zemanek was once more driven to justify the genuine and distinct character of international law that essentially differs in its structure from any other kind of legal order. Apart from this act of legitimate self-defence of international lawyers against an ongoing armed attack from other disciplines of law, and hence from outside, there was another aspect to Professor Zemanek’s reaction.