For example, if America had intelligence that North Korea had alerted military forces and was fueling long-range missiles on their launchpads or rolling out missile launcher vehicles, the United States could reasonably assume an attack was imminent and unavoidable and could legally launch a pre-emptive strike in what international lawyers call “anticipatory self-defense.”

However, if America attacked because President Trump was worried that continued North Korean missile and nuclear weapons development would ultimately increase Pyongyang’s ability to hold American cities at risk, the strike would no longer be “anticipatory” or “pre-emptive.” It would clearly be preventive — in legal terms, no different from a North Korean first strike against America motivated by Kim Jong-un’s fear that America might one day attack North Korea.

Preventive strikes are not legal under international law or the United Nations Charter. Indeed, the charter has a name for such an operation. It is “aggression.”

추천 2