Tom Ruys, ‘Armed Attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 585 pp, hb £91.00.
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12009_4 |
| Date | 01 January 2013 |
| Author | Heather A. Harrison Dinniss |
| Published date | 01 January 2013 |
Mussawir rarely names names, so it is likely that Mussawir’s criticisms will miss
their target. But more than anything Jurisdiction in Deleuze is a difficult book
because it is a restless book; instead of entering the interior of a concept, a
problem, a theory or a theorist – of getting lost in law’s labyrinths – Mussawir
moves sideways across the surfaces of the problem at the centre of the book, the
problem of what it is to be a legal scholar:
I began . . .with an attraction to those who were engaged in criticism, in a ‘radical’
critique of law and in the broader reception of continental theory to legal studies and
was left with a much different affinity: one reserved for those who just seemed to
have an interest in local jurisprudence; those whose investment in the study of law
was less than critical but just practical, vocational or personal (xi).
In this respect Jurisdiction in Deleuze embodies both Mussawir’s fascination with
Deleuze and desire to ‘apply’ Deleuze, and his realisation that a critical engage-
ment with law might in the end require him to abandon Deleuze.Perhaps instead
of trying to domesticate Jurisdiction in Deleuze, instead of trying to understand it,
we should treat its complexity, its restlessness, as both a symptom of critical
scholarship – a form of scholarship that continually comes back to the questions
‘who are “we”?’ and ‘what are “we” doing?’ – and a sign of a new movement
within critical scholarship, what might be called the ‘new positivism’ or the
‘return to law’. In this respect,for all its difficulties, Jurisdiction in Deleuze may well
contribute to the formation of a new ‘we’ in critical legal scholarship.
Nick Piška*
Tom Ruys,‘Armed Attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2010, 585 pp, hb £91.00.
Tom Ruys has written an eminently readable and thorough analysis of the law
relating to the notion of an armed attack. Based originally on his doctoral thesis,
it represents a significant contribution to work in the area.Although the right of
self-defence and the armed attack criter ion have received a lot of scholarly
attention since the attacks of 9/11, Ruys’s work adds a carefully researched and
considered voice to the debate.
‘Armed Attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter is divided into six chapters.The
first two detail the methodological debate, the centrality of ‘armed attack’ as a
criterion and the other general conditions for self-defence, vis necessity, propor-
tionality and the procedural requirements required under the UN Charter
system.The following three chapters are the real meat of Ruys’s work,with each
chapter dedicated to one of the major areas of debate surrounding the concept
of an armed attack: what actions will constitute an armed attack (rationae mate-
*University of Kent.
bs_bs_banner
Reviews
© 2013 TheAuthors. The Modern Law Review © 2013The Modern Law Review Limited. 187
(2013) 76(1) MLR 178–190
To continue reading
Request your trial