Cf. e.g. Alston: “Missiles fired from drones are not categorically different from other weapons like missiles fired from gunships or bullets from a soldier’s gun”, Alston 2010.
Art 42: “Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations”.
4.
5.
The full wording of Art. 51 reads: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
6.
7.
PhilipAlston,. ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execution. Study on targeted killings’. General Assembly, United Nations. May28th, 2010. UN-Document A/HRC/14/24/Add. 6.
JonasFinke, 2010., Kohärenz in der völkerrechtlichen Behandlung nichtstaatlicher Gewaltakteure’, in BJelena äumlerDaaseCindySchliemannChristianSteigerDominik, ed., Akteure in Krieg und Frieden. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Verlag, pp. 47-68.
13.
GilbertPaul, 2007. ‘Civilian Immunity in the, New Wars’, in IgorPrimoratz, ed., Civilian Immunity in War. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 201-216
14.
RainerHofmann,. 2002, ‘International Law and the Use of Military Force Against Iraq’, in German Yearbook of International Law 45 (2002), pp. 9-34.
15.
HasnainKazim, 2011, Pakistanische Klagen gegen US-Drohnen’ in Spiegel Online, January20th, 2011.
16.
JulesLobel, 1999. ‘The Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks: The Bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan’, in The Yale Journal of International Law24 (1999), pp. 537-557.
17.
ReinMüllerson, 2003. ‘Jus ad Bellum and International Terrorism’, in: Israel Yearbook on Human Rights32 (2003), pp. 1-51.
18.
EricMyjerWhiteNigel, 2002. ‘The Twin Towers Attack: As Unlimited Right to Self-Defense’ in 7 Journal of Conflict and Security Law 17 (2002).
19.
DirkNabers, 2005, Allianz gegen den Terror. Deutschland, Japan und die USA. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag filer Sozialwissenschafiten.
20.
AhmedRashid, 2010. Sturz ins Chaos. Afghanistan, Pakistan und die Rückkehr der Taliban. Darmstadt: Leske Verlag.
21.
HeikoSchmitz-Elvenich, 2008. Targeted Killing. Die vökerrechtliche Zulässigkeit der gezielten Tötungvon Terror is ten in Ausland. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
22.
Sofaer,Abraham D, 2003. ‘On the Necessity of Pre-emption’, in European Journal of International Law Vol. 14, no. 2 (2003), pp. 209-226
23.
ChristianTomuschat, 2001., Der11. September und seine rechtlichen Konsequenzen’ in Europaeische Grundrechte-Zeitschrift, pp. 535-545.
24.
DierkWalter, 2006. Islamistischer Terrorismus. Hintergrunde und Gegenstrategien. Schwalbach/Taunus: Wochenschau Verlag.
25.
PaulWilkinson, 1992. ‘International Terrorism: New Risks to World Order’ in: BaylisJohnRenggerN.J., Dilemmas of World Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 228-260.
26.
YooJohn, 2003. ‘Future implications of the Iraq conflict’ in The American Journal of International Law97 (2003), pp. 563-576.
