Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Out in paperback in December:
The Responsibility to Protect and the Failures of the United Nations Security Council
#R2P #InternationalLaw #Sanctions #Countermeasures
bloomsbury.com/uk/responsibil…
English
Patrick Butchard
1.5K posts
Patrick Butchard
@PatrickButchard
Senior Lecturer in Law @ehu_lcp @edgehill. International Law Researcher @UKParliament @commonslibrary Author: https://t.co/xvCwGGbyQ2
Liverpool, UK Katılım Ocak 2010
4K Takip Edilen1.3K Takipçiler
@Andre_de_Hoogh Of course, whether that should be the case or whether this is a desirable outcome is a question of politics and policy, but all the more reason why specific rules on the formulation for authorising force would be very welcome and important for legal certainty.
English
@Andre_de_Hoogh ... specific legal basis, such as self defence or consent, are permitted to do so, then the recommendation would be restrictive. But the ambiguity itself leaves room for states to argue that authorisation is inherent in the recommendation itself...
English
Constructive ambiguity is always interesting - if the Council has the power to authorise action, but instead of using that word simply "strongly encourages" it, then is the authorisation is still there? Wouldn't make sense to say "you should do x, but we're not authorising it".
بيسان أبو كويك Biesan Abu-Kwaik@Biesan_AK
New: after multiple delays، diplomatic sources tell me vote on the Bahrain draft on the Strait of Hormuz will take place tomorrow at 11. In new revision circulated today OP2 reads as follows with major change from Authorizes to encourages: “Strongly encourages States interested in the use of commercial maritime routes in the Strait of Hormuz to coordinate efforts, defensive in nature, commensurate to the circumstances, to contribute to ensuring the safety and security of navigation across the Strait of Hormuz, including through the escort of merchant and commercial vessels, and to deter attempts to close, obstruct or otherwise interfere with international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.”
English
@Andre_de_Hoogh If a powerful body is telling you to do something, is the authorisation to do that thing implied by the encouragement itself? Ambiguity is clearly a diplomatic/political tool, but I'm not sure it completely eradicates all legal effects of the Council's decisions / encouragements.
English
@Andre_de_Hoogh Exactly - 2249 is the perfect example. My point is more that the Council doesn't (yet) have any specific rules for how it authorises force, only practice and repeated language. My point is a little more general (cont..)
English
Patrick Butchard retweetledi
UNSC consultations ended without clarity on whether there will be a vote tomorrow on the #Hormuz Strait draft reso. I suspect we'll know more later this evening regarding whether #Bahrain decides to put it to a vote despite the draft not having council unanimity.
Rami Ayari@Raminho
Diplomats say that, at #France's request, the #UNSC will hold closed consultations at 3 pm today regarding #Bahrain's #Hormuz Strait draft resolution.
English
Patrick Butchard retweetledi
Diplomats say that, at #France's request, the #UNSC will hold closed consultations at 3 pm today regarding #Bahrain's #Hormuz Strait draft resolution.
بيسان أبو كويك Biesan Abu-Kwaik@Biesan_AK
Update: Diplomatic sources are telling me Russia, China and France (separately) have broken silence on the Bahrain draft. Despite removal of Chapter 7 language they are still citing ongoing concerns and want Bahrain to work with council members to reach an amicable solution. France on the other hand wants emphasis on freedom of navigation.
English
Sorry. Wrong document number for UK Letter
S/2026/140
digitallibrary.un.org/record/4105535…
English
Been waiting for this one too - contrast the UK's relatively to the point letter, reporting Article 51 self-defence action to the UNSC.
Mentions necessity and proportionality generally, but also that Gulf states have requested UK collective defense.
UN Doc S/2026/161
Patrick Butchard@PatrickButchard
Israel's letter, dated 10 March, also available. Arguments along the same lines as the US letter, citing ongoing hostilities and claiming defensive action. UN Doc S/2026/162 digitallibrary.un.org/record/4105909…
English
Patrick Butchard retweetledi
Israel's letter of the same date also seeks to justify combat operations taken in cooperation with US, but whereas US letter explicitly invokes Article 51, Israel speaks more generally of its "right and duty to defend itself and its citizens" without specific citation of Art.51.
Patrick Butchard@PatrickButchard
Events moving quickly, so missed when this was published. US letter to UN Security Council, dated 10 March. Claims force against Iran is "self-defence" Art 51, and "ongoing" conflict since 2025. Lots to assess on claims. One thing clear - international law is back in the room.
English
English
@SCProcedure @PatrickButchard As always, you taught me something new @SCProcedure! Yes, I saw the document come across the wire this morning but I guess it as officially published yesterday :)
English
Events moving quickly, so missed when this was published.
US letter to UN Security Council, dated 10 March. Claims force against Iran is "self-defence" Art 51, and "ongoing" conflict since 2025.
Lots to assess on claims. One thing clear - international law is back in the room.
English
@FortiD I thought so, but doubted whether I'd missed it!
English
@PatrickButchard To be fair, the UN only published this letter today!
English
Should also mention that Iran has made counter-arguments of course.
Has written to the UN almost every day since the US action began late Feb
#searchresultsbox" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">digitallibrary.un.org/search?ln=en&a…
English
Link to Letter, UN Doc S/2026/161
digitallibrary.un.org/record/4105908…
English
Israel's letter, dated 10 March, also available.
Arguments along the same lines as the US letter, citing ongoing hostilities and claiming defensive action.
UN Doc S/2026/162
digitallibrary.un.org/record/4105909…
Patrick Butchard@PatrickButchard
Events moving quickly, so missed when this was published. US letter to UN Security Council, dated 10 March. Claims force against Iran is "self-defence" Art 51, and "ongoing" conflict since 2025. Lots to assess on claims. One thing clear - international law is back in the room.
English
Patrick Butchard retweetledi
The agenda used by the Security Council solely for considering Iran's nuclear programme - "Non-proliferation" - was just adopted at the meeting by a vote of 11 in favour, China & Russia voting against, and Pakistan & Somalia abstaining.
SC Procedure@SCProcedure
Normally, when any Council member wants to block a meeting, they do so at the outset by requesting a vote on the agenda. Since, under Rule 9, adopting the agenda is the 1st order of business for an SC meeting, if there are not at least 9 votes in favour, the mtg can't go forward.
English
Patrick Butchard retweetledi
Tomorrow morning (12 March), the #UNSC is scheduled to hold a briefing on the work of the 1737 Sanctions Committee concerning Iran.
◻ No briefer is expected
→ Read more: bit.ly/3NaHYNh
English