10.5 Compulsive Means: Retortion and Reprisals

The non-peaceful borderland — coercion short of (prohibited) war: Retortion: the unfriendly but lawful act in response — the diplomatic recall, visa denials, tariff increases within treaty rights: pressure without a breach (lawful because within the actor's rights); Reprisals: the otherwise-unlawful act made conditionally lawful as a response to a prior international delinquency — the classical doctrine (the Naulilaa arbitration's conditions: prior breach, proportionality, an unsatisfied demand). The Charter era: armed reprisals abolished (Art. 2(4) — no forcible self-help); the non-forcible reprisal survives as "countermeasures" — codified in the ARSIWA (2001): the injured state's temporary, reversible non-performance to induce compliance; the conditions' discipline: proportionality, reversibility, no violation of jus cogens, humanitarian obligations or diplomatic protection; notification and demand prerequisites; The museum (short notes): embargo — the detention of the delinquent state's ships/goods in port (the pre-Charter device; the modern multilateral sanctions-embargo's distinction); pacific blockade — blockade without war (the 19th century's practice; now unlawful). The bookkeeping conclusion: all unilateral forcible coercion is now prohibited; the non-forcible countermeasure strictly conditioned; only the collective sanctions (the Security Council's) are lawful coercion — the system's monopoly design. Exam Focus Long questions: "Classify the means of settling international disputes under Article 33." / "'The ICJ's jurisdiction is founded on consent.' Explain with Article 36's routes." / "Distinguish retortion from reprisal and explain the modern…