CONTENT OF NUMBER
AND SUMMARIES OF ARTICLES

EURASIAN LAW JOURNAL №7(170)2022

Image

PROBLEMS OF ORGANIZATION AND Advocacy PROFESSION FUNCTIONING
Ragulin A.V. Shaykhullin M.S.
Modern problems and tendencies of professional development of advocate
Zaborovsky V.V.
Features advocate’s legal status in Ukraine

ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF ADVOCACY PRACTICE
Timofeeva A.V.
Advocate’s participation in civil proceedings in the Czech Republic

EURASIAN GEOPOLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Farkhutdinov I. Z.
Israel doctrine on preventive self-defence and international law
Farkhutdinov I. Z.

Mogherini strategy and military doctrine of trump:the challenges ahead Russia
Farkhutdinov I. Z.

The iranian doctrine of preventive self-defence and international law

PROBLEMS OF ORGANIZATION AND Advocacy PROFESSION FUNCTIONING
Ragulin A.V. Shaykhullin M.S.
Modern problems and tendencies of professional development of advocate
Purpose:
Research of the main directions and tendencies of professional development of advocate in Russia.
Methodology: Authors applied formal-legal method, a method of the included supervision, a statistical method, sociological methods, a method of theoretical modeling.
Results: In article authors revealed and analyzed the main tendencies of such directions of professional development of the identity of advocate as selection and attraction of shots in advocate’s educations, questions of increase in distinctions in legal status of the trainee of advocate’s and the paralegal assistant are considered, problems of improvement of system of professional education of advocate’s and occupation of advocates by scientific and pedagogical activity, assignment questions to the honorary titles and corporate awards of advocate’s profession are investigated.
Novelty/originality/value: In article are generalized the provision of earlier published scientific works on the considered problem and author’s ideas, generalizations, conclusions and the offers directed on improvement of system of professional development of advocate possessing scientific novelty and the practical importance contain.
Keywords: advocacy profession, professional development of advocate, attraction of shots in advocacy profession, the trainee of the advocate, professional education of advocates.
Work bibliographic list
1. Avdeev S. Status advokata tol'ko dlja svoih. Jurist osparivaet v Konstitucionnom sude svoe pravo stat' zashhitnikom // Rossijskaja gazeta. – 2006. – 1 avgusta (# 166).
2. Bojkov A.D. Status advokata: soderzhanie, kvalifikacionnye trebovanija i principy advokatskoj dejatel'nosti: Monografija. – M.: JuRKOMPANI, 2010.
3. Busurina E.O. Prinuditel'noe obuchenie po povysheniju kvalifikacii kak mera disciplinarnoj otvetstvennosti advokata // Evrazijskaja advokatura. – 2012. – # 1.
4. Dehanov S.A. Organizacija advokatury i professional'naja jetika advokatov v Zapadnoj Evrope. –M.: Jurlitinform, 2012.
5. Ignatov S.D. Konceptual'nye osnovy organizacii advokatury v Rossii (voprosy teorii i praktiki): Monografija. – Izhevsk: ID «Udmurtskij universitet», 2006.
6. K advokatu prositsja stazher // Rossijskij advokat. – 2003. – # 4.
7. Libanova S.Je. Advokatura Rossijskoj Federacii v mehanizme konstitucionnogo garantirovanija zashhity prav i svobod: Monografija. – Kurgan, 2009.
8. Lubshev Ju.F. Kurs advokatskogo prava: Uchebnik. – 2-e izd. – M.: OOO «Profobrazovanie», 2004.
9. Mel'nichenko R.G. Advokatskaja dejatel'nost'. Universal'noe pravilo uspeha. – M.: ITK «Dashkov i K», 2010.
10. Mel'nichenko R.G. Advokatura: Ucheb. posob. – M.:ITK «Dashkov i K», 2009.
11. Mel'nichenko R.G., Stepanov P.I. Osnovy uspeshnoj advokatskoj dejatel'nosti: Ucheb. posob. – Jelista,2006.
12. Mel'nichenko R.G. «Zachem mne orden, ja soglasen na medal'»: o korporativnyh nagradah rossijskih advokatov // Advokatskaja praktika. – 2008. – # 4.
13. Mel'nichenko R.G. Advokaturu vycherknuli iz nauki // Advokat. – 2009. – # 6.
14. Pavlov B.B. K voprosu ob advokatskoj kul'ture //Advokatura. Gosudarstvo. Obshhestvo: Sb. materialov IV Vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii / Otv. red.: S.I. Volodina, Ju.S. Pilipenko. – M., 2007.
15. Pospelov O.V. Kvalifikacionnyj jekzamen v advokatskih palatah goroda Moskvy i Moskovskoj oblasti v 2003–2006 godah // Advokatura. Gosudarstvo. Obshhestvo: Sb. materialov IV Vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii / Otv. red.: S.I. Volodina, Ju.S. Pilipenko. – M., 2007.
16. Revina I.V. Nravstvennye osnovy povedenija advokata vo vzaimootnoshenijah s podzashhitnym i sledovatelem // Advokatura, gosudarstvo, obshhestvo. – M.,
2006.
17. Rjazancev V. Komanda Knjazeva// Rossijskij advokat. – 2005. – # 1.
18. Sbornik normativnyh aktov i dokumentov / Pod obshh. red. E.V. Semenjako, Ju.S. Pilipenko. – M.: Inform-Pravo, 2010.
19. Sergeev V.I. Advokat, pomoshhnik, stazher: postoronnim vhod vospreshhen // Biznes-advokat. – 2004. –# 8.
20. Stecovskij Ju.I. Stanovlenie advokatury v Rossii. – M.: Volters Kluver, 2010.
21. Fojnickij I.Ja. Zashhita v ugolovnom prave. –M., 1885.
22. Chashin A.N. Motivacija advokatskogo truda //Advokat. – 2005. – # 11.

PROBLEMS OF ORGANIZATION AND Advocacy PROFESSION FUNCTIONING
Zaborovsky V.V.
Features advocate’s legal status in Ukraine
Purpose:
Research of concept and structure of legal status of the advocate in Ukraine and his fixing in the Law of Ukraine «About advocacy profession and advocate’s activity».
Methodology: The author applied formal-legal method and a method of the included supervision.
Results: In article situation that legal status of advocate represents a combination of the rights, duties of the advocate, responsibility and guarantees of his activity is formulated. The conclusion that the Law of Ukraine «About advocacy profession and advocate’s activity» did not justify the related hopes on increase of legal status of the advocate in society is also drawn, it is noted that a number of the rights and guarantees of activity of the advocate, fixed in the law, has declarative character. Novelty/originality/value: Article represents the scientific value as it is one of the first attempts of the analysis of legal status of advocate in the Ukrainian republic by the new legislation.
Keywords: advocate, legal status of the advocate, right of the advocate, legal aid, guarantees of activity of the lawyer.
Work bibliographic list
1. Bojkov A.D. Status advokata: soderzhanie, kvalifikacionnye trebovanija i principy advokatskoj dejatel'nosti: Avtoref. dis. ... kand. jurid. nauk. – M., 2010.
2. Grudcyna L. Ju. Garantii nezavisimosti, samoupravlenija i finansirovanija advokatskoj dejatel'nosti // Novyj juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2013. – # 1.
3. Pjatin E.I. Voprosy dostupnosti dlja naselenija Rossii kvalificirovannoj juridicheskoj pomoshhi, okazyvaemoj advokatami // Novyj juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2013. – # 1.
4. Hotenec P.V. Pravovoj status advokata v Ukraine: Avtoref. dis. ... kand. jurid. – H., 2002.
 
ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF ADVOCACY PRACTICE
Timofeeva A.V.
Advocate’s participation in civil proceedings in the Czech Republic
Purpose:
Research of legal and organizational questions of activity of the lawyer in civil process in the Czech Republic.
Methodology: The author applied a formal-legal method and a method of the included supervision.
Results: In article the characteristic is given to the rights and duties of the advocate as participant of civil process in the Czech Republic in relation to the clients and colleagues, and also concerning bodies of judicial authority. Conclusions concerning conditions of providing legal services are also formulated by the «European» and foreign lawyers.
Novelty/originality/value: Article represents the scientific value as it is one of the first works devoted to legal status of the advocate in the Czech republic, published in the Russian scientific periodicals.
Keywords: the law of foreign states, the Czech Republic, the legal profession, the lawyer, the attorney, the advocate, the advocate’s status, the civil proceedings, the Czech Bar Association, the foreign advocate, the European lawyer, the rights and duties of an advocate.
Work bibliographic list
1. Bulín, H. Advokát jako nucený zástupce dovolatele v občanském řízení soudním (K výkladu druhé věty § 241 občanského soudního řádu). Bulletin advokacie, 1996. – # 5.
2. Chudáčková M. Evropský advokát // Bulletin advokacie. – 2002. – # 8.
3. Svejkovský, J., Vychopeň, M., Krym, L., Pejchal, A. a kol. Zákon o advokacii. Komentář. 1. vydání. Praha:C. H. Beck, 2012.
4. Birjukov P.N. Sudy obshhej jurisdikcii Cheshskoj Respubliki // Rossijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2012. – # 6.
5. Gritchina A.A. Apelljacija kak institut sovremennogo grazhdanskogo processa // Obrazovanie i pravo. – 2012. – # 6.
 
EURASIAN GEOPOLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Farkhutdinov I. Z.
Israel doctrine on preventive self-defence and international law
The article, which is the sixth copyrighted material in this series, deals with the problems of preventive military strike by Israel against other states and terrorist groups. That was Israel who has committed in 1967 the first major pre-emptive military strike on the Egyptian air forces congestion. The Israeli military doctrine is based on attacking strategy and allows the possibility of strikes with purpose of selfdefence.
Author retrospective traces the evolution of the country's military concept in the course of more than half a century of military confrontation in the Middle East. The Israeli theory and practice of pre-emptive military strike served as a great help for the formation of the American doctrine of so-called preventive self-defense.
The author tries to find the answer, why during all three years of active fighting in Syria so-called Islamic State (ISIS), which was grown, financed, armed and sent by the United States, has never attacked Israel. Israel intends to expand the scope of preventive defense – not only conventional but also nuclear.
Keywords: self-defense principle, preventive attack, pre-emptive self-defense, deterrence strategy, Six Day War, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, Article 51 of the UN, Osirak nuclear reactor Dimone, Mordechai Vanunu, The Sampson Option, Jericho-3.
Work bibliographic list
1. CDI Delivery Systems. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – rezhim dostupa: www.cdi.org/issues/nukef&f/database/isnukes.html (data obrashhenija: 12.10.2016).
2. Changes and Continuities in Israeli Security Policy BYCivcik, Zeynep. Middle East Technical University, 2004.
3. Cohan John Alan. The Bush Doctrine and the Emerging Norm of Anticipatory Self-Defense in Customary International Law Pace International Law Review Volume 15. Issue 2. Fall 2003. Article 1.
4. Cordesman A., Burke Arleigh A. Weapons of Mass Destruction in Middle East. April 15. 2003, p. 43. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – rezhim dostupa: http://www.iraqwatch.org/perspectives/csis-middleeast_wmd-041503.pdf (data obrashhenija: 12.10.2016).
5. Emmanoucla Mylonaki - Khalid Khedri. Re-assessing the use of force against terrorism under international law.
6. Frank, Tomas. Resours to Force: Threats and Armed attacks. 2002.
7. Ghazala Yasmin .Israel vs Arab Nuclear Programmes: A Comparative Study.
8. Gray Christine. International Law on the Use of Forse. Third edition. Oxford University Press. 2008.
9. Hakimi Monica. Defensive Force against Non-State Actors: The State of Play // International Law Studies 1(2015).
10. International Law and Armed Conflict: Exploring the Fault lines Essays in Honour of Yoram Dinstein. Edited by Michael Schmitt and Jelena Pejic. International Humanitarian Law Series. Nith off Publishers Leiden. – Boston, 2007.
11. Jordan J. Paust.Armed Attacs and Imputation:would a nuclear weaponized Iran trigger permissible Israil and U.S. mearsures of self-defence? // Georgtown Jornal of International Law. Vol. 45.
12. Kattan Victor. The Use and Abuse of Self-Defence in International Law.
13. Kenan Dulger. Turkish Pre-Emptive Strikes on Northern Iraq and the Bush Doctrine // European Scientific Journal. – December edition vol. 8. – No. 29.
14. Kevin Jon Heller. Does the Six Day War Support «Elongated » Imminence?»
15. Kretzmer David. The Inherent Right to Self Defence and Proportionality in Jus Ad Bellum // The European Journal of International Law. Vol. 24 (2013). – No. 1.
16. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I. C.J.
17. Nagan Winston. Hammer Craig. The New Bush National Security Doctrine and the Rule of Law.
18. Nuclear stockpiles. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – rezhim dostupa: http://www.nuclearfiles.org/kinuclearweapons/stockpile.htm (data obrashhenija: 12.10.2016).
19. O’Connell Mary Ellen. The Myth of Preemptive Self-Defense// The American Society of International Law. 2000.
20. O’Connell M. E. Evidence of Terror // Journal of Conflict and Security Law. V. 7 (April 2002). – N 1.
21. The first war on terrorism: counter-terrorism policy during the Reagan administration / David C. Wills. Copyright 02003 by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
22. Wedgwood Ruth. The Fall of Saddam Hussein: Security Council Mandates and Preemtive Self-Defense // American Journal of International Law. Vol. 97 (2003).
23. Ashavskij B. M. K voprosu o tolkovanii stat'i 51 Ustava OON// Materialy konferencii v chest' pro-
fessora kafedry mezhdunarodnogo prava juridicheskogo fakul'teta Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta L. N. Galenskoj / Pod red. S. V. Bahina. – SPbGU, 2009.
24. Bekjashev K. A. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i gosudarstva //
Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. − 2013. − # 5 (61).
25. Bol'shoj tolkovyj slovar' russkogo jazyka / pod obshh. red. D. N. Ushakova. – M.: Ast-Astrel', 2008.
26. Vereshhetin V. S. O nekotoryh koncepcijah v sovremennoj doktrine mezhdunarodnogo publichnogo prava // Materialy konferencii v chest' professora L.N. Galenskoj / Pod red. S. V. Bahina. – SPbGU, 2009.
27. Gorbunov Ju. S. Uprezhdajushhie mery v svete sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo prava // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. – 2008. – # 3.
28. Gorodeckij G. Mif «Ledokola»: nakanune vojny. –M., 1995.
29. Kirilenko V. P., Korostelev S. V. K voprosu o prave gosudarstv na uprezhdajushhee primenenie voennoj sily // Voennaja mysl'. 2011. – #9.
30. Kotljar B. C. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i sovremennye strategicheskie koncepcii SShA i NATO: Avtoref.… dokt. jurid. nauk. − M., 2007.
31. Kotljar B. C. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i sovremennye strategicheskie koncepcii SShA i NATO. – Kazan':Centr innovacionnyh tehnologij. – 2008.
32. Lukashuk I. I. Mirovoj porjadok HHI veka // Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo. – 2002. − # 1.
33. Maleev Ju. N. Reabilitacija adekvatnogo i proporcional'nogo primenenija sily // Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava. – 2004. – # 3/55.
34. Maleev Ju. N. Rossija i mezhdunarodnoe pravo. Materialy mezhdunarodnoj konferencii, posvjashhennoj 100-letiju F.I. Kozhevnikova. – M.: Izd. MGIMOUniversitet, 2006.
35. Malinin S. A. Pravo mezhdunarodnoj bezopasnosti// Kurs mezhdunarodnogo prava: v 7 t. – M., 1989. T. 4.
36. Mjullerson R. A., Sheffer D. Dzh. Pravovoe regulirovanie primenenija sily // Vne konfrontacii. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo v period holodnoj vojny. Sbornik statej. – M., 1996.
37. Orbeljan A. S. Pravo gosudarstv na primenenie vooruzhjonnoj sily v uslovijah sovremennyh mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij: Avtoref. dis. …. kand. jurid. nauk. – M., 2008.
38. Sinicyna Ju. V. Pravomernost' primenenija prava na samooboronu protiv terroristicheskoj ugrozy v kontekste stat'e 51 Ustava OON // Pravo.by. – 2009. –# 4.
39. Skotnikov L. A. Pravo na samooboronu i novye imperativy bezopasnosti // Mezhdunarodnaja zhizn'. –2004. – # 9.
40. Tatarinov M. Voennaja doktrina Izrailja // Zarubezhnoe voennoe obozrenie. – 2015. – #6.
41. Tikitiner A. A. Obzor Livano-Izrail'skih otnoshenij i polozhenie Izrailja. Lichnyj sajt. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. –rezhim dostupa: http://tiktiner.ru/lecture25 (data obrashhenija: 15.10.2016).
42. Tuzmuhamedov B. Uprezhdenie siloj: «Karolina i sovremennost'» // Rossija v global'noj politike. 6 maja 2002.
43. Farhutdinov I. Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i doktrina SShA o preventivnoj samooborone // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2016. –# 2.
44. Farhutdinov I. Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o primenenii gosudarstvom voennoj sily protiv negosudarstvennyh uchastnikov // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2016. –# 7.
45. Farhutdinov I. Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o principe neprimenenija sily ili ugrozy siloj: istorija i sovremennost' // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal.–2015. –# 11.
46. Farhutdinov I. Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o samooborone gosudarstv // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2016. –# 1.
47. Farhutdinov I. Z. Obespechenie mira i bezopasnosti: mezhdunarodno-pravovaja ocenka sobytij v Sirii //Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2015. –# 10.
48. Hlestov O. N. Rossijskaja doktrina mezhdunarodnogo prava // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2013. – # 3(58).
49. Hlestov O. N., Myshljaeva M. L. Vooruzhennaja bor'ba protiv mezhdunarodnogo terrorizma (politiko-pravovye aspekty // Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava. –2001. –# 4.
50. Hmelinec S. M. Voennaja doktrina Gosudarstva Izrail'. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. –rezhim dostupa: http://www.iimes.ru/rus/stat/ (data obrashhenija: 15.10.2016).
51. Cyganjuk A. D. Mif o neobhodimosti preventivnogo udara. Izrail' gotovilsja k shestidnevnoj vojne neskol'ko let // Voenno-promyshlennyj kur'er. –2007.–# 21 (187).
52. Chernichenko S. V. Obshhepriznannye principy i normy mezhdunarodnogo prava i mezhdunarodnye dogovory Rossijskoj Federacii // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. –2015. –# 8(87).
53. Jehud Jaari. Pochemu IGIL obhodit storonoj Izrail'? // Jeho Rossii. 6 aprelja 2016 g.
54. Janov O., Ivanov I. Antiterroristicheskie aspekty dejstvij vooruzhennyh sil Izrailja // Zarubezhnoe voennoe obozrenie. –2006. –# 8.
 
EURASIAN GEOPOLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Farkhutdinov I. Z.
Mogherini strategy and military doctrine of trump: the challenges ahead Russia
In the article, which continues the cycle of articles of the author on international security strategies, the problems of European security are being discussed. February 7th 1992 the twelve member States of the European economic community (EEC) signed in Maastricht the Treaty on European Union (EU), which brought the European integration process launched in the 1950s to a qualitatively new level. The adoption in 2003 The European security strategy was the first attempt of the European Union to create a global policy document, which could match with the us national security strategy or other similar national documents.
If you compare the European security strategy and the Strategy of national security of the United States 2001 (as amended 2006), Europe and America as key to its security is essentially the same threats: international terrorism, proliferation of WMD, regional conflicts, expansion of the influence of religious fundamentalism, "incapacitated" state. Combines the strategy of the US and EU recognition of the fact that the factor of geographical distance has lost its protective property in the context of global threats that transcend borders. The new European security strategy (Strategy Mogherini) as a whole is based on the Strategy of 2003, but adopted with taking into account the new geopolitical reality (Brexit, the situation of refugees, the conflict in Ukraine, etc.). Also, under the new concept, Russia is a "strategic challenge for Europe".
In turn, the post of President of the United States, Donald Trump intends to concentrate on the defeat of ISIL, developing a new cybersecurity strategy and modernization of the armed forces. In relations with Russia, Trump declares possible cooperation on critical geopolitical issues (especially on the situation in Syria).
Work bibliographic list
1. Biskop S. Osnovy obnovlennoj Evropejskoj strategii bezopasnosti // Vestnik mezhdunarodnyh organizacij. – 2009. – # 2 (24). – S.105-120.
2. Kashkin S. Ju., Chetverikov A. O. Pravo Evropejskogo Sojuza. Tom.1. Obshhaja chast'. Pod red. professora S.Ju. Kashkina. – M.: Jurajt, 2013.
3. Prihod'ko O. V. Transatlanticheskie otnoshenija v sfere bezopasnosti i ih vlijanie na vneshnepoliticheskie pozicii Rossii. – M.,2004.
4. Rusakovich A. V. Obshhaja vneshnjaja politika i politika bezopasnosti evropejskogo sojuza: stanovlenie i osobennosti // Mezhdunarodnaja konferencija «Evropejskij Sojuz i Respublika Belarus': perspektivy sotrudnichestva» (International conference «The European
Union and Republic of Belarus: Getting Closer for Better Future»): sb. materialov. — Minsk: Izd. centr BGU, 2014. – C. 21-27.
5. Talajko T. Vojna v Irake i transatlanticheskie otnoshenija // Zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava i mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij. – 2005. – # 2. —S. 55-61.
6. Alyson J. K. Bailes. The European Security Strategy An Evolutionary History. SIPRI Policy Paper No. 10. – Sweden, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), 2005.
7. Bradford William C. «The duty to defend them»: a natural lawjustification for the bushdoctrine of preventive war // Notre Dame Law Rewiew. – Volume 79. – 7.1.2004. – P. 1365-1372.
8. Bendiek A., Kaim M. New European Security Strategy – The Transatlantic Factor. – June 2015.
9. Boniface P. European Security and Transatlanticism in the Twenty-first Century. In: NATO and European Security: Alliance Politics from the End of the Cold War to the Age of Terrorism. Ed. by Moens A., Cohen L., and Sens A. – Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers, 2003.
10. Directorate-general for external policies. Policy Department. Towards a new european security strategy? assessing the impact of changes in the global security environment ep/expo/b/sede/fwc/2013-08/lot6/05. – june 2015 - pe 534.989. – European Union, 2015.
11. EN. A secure Europe in a better world. European security strategy. – Brussels, 12.12.2003.
12. European Council. Brussels, 28 June 2016. (OR. en). EUCO 26/16. Conclusions – 28 June 2016.
13. Giovanni, Grevi. «ESDP institutions». In European Security and Defence Policy: the First Ten Years (1999-2009). Edited by Giovanni Grevi, Damien Helly and Daniel Keohane. – Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.– P.19-68.
14. House of Commons. Defence Committee. The future of NATO and European defence. Ninth Report of Session 2007–08. Report together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. – Published on 20 March 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited.
15. Rehrl Jochen. Handbook for decision makers the common security and defence policy of the European Union. Vienna: Armed Forces Printing Centre, 2014.
16. Riga Conference Papers 2015 «Towards Reassurance and Solidarity in the Euro-Atlantic Community”. –Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 2015.
17. Treaty of Nice. Amending the treaty on European Union, the treaties establishing the european communities and certain related acts. – 10.3. 2001. – C. 80/7.
 
EURASIAN GEOPOLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Farkhutdinov I. Z.
The iranian doctrine of preventive self-defence and international law
In this article, which was the eighth copyrighted material in a series of «Law of international security», discusses the problems of preventive military strike by Iran against Israel, and vice versa. A preventive attack for decades is an essential element of the defense doctrine of Israel. The US, like Israel, under the doctrine of preventive self-defence are ready to take action in self-defense for preventing hostile acts, but when faced with «hostile intentions». The United States and Israel are the main opponents of Iran. Both Russia and Iran are independent centers of power and security in Syria. Iran is a long-term partner and a natural ally in the fight against «Islamic state». The right of States to pre-emptive action in various forms is justified in the framework of the UN Charter, but this framework can not be strictly formalized due to the lack of a uniform objective basis for qualification of actions of the States. A preemptive strike is not and should not be the only means of preventing war.
Keywords: International law, resolution No. 2231 of the UN Security Council, «Osirak», Joint comprehensive plan of action (SVPD), Israil docktrine of preventive strike, Iran
ian nuclear program, anticipatory self-defence, preemptive strike, «Tanker war», «Islamic state».
Work bibliographic list
1. Baklickij A., Vajc R. Soglashenie po iranskoj jadernoj programme: vozmozhnosti i pregrady dlja rossijsko-amerikanskogo sotrudnichestva // Rossija v global'noj politike. - 2016. - 29 aprelja.
2. Maleev Ju. N. Reabilitacija adekvatnogo i proporcional'nogo primenenija sily // Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava. – 2004. – # 3/55.
3. Maleev Ju. N. Preventivnaja samooborona v sovremennom formate. -Rossija i mezhdunarodnoe pravo.Materialy mezhdunarodnoj konferencii, posvjashhennoj 100-letiju F. I. Kozhevnikova. – M.: Izd. MGIMO-Universitet, 2006.
4. Naryshkin S. E Gosudarstvennyj perevorot v Kieve v fevrale 2014 g. i mezhdunarodnoe pravo. Interv'ju //Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. − 2015. − # 2(81).
5. Farhutdinov I.Z.Preventivnaja samooborona v mezhdunarodnom prave: primenenie i zloupotreblenie//Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava.– 2016. – # 4/104.
6. Farhutdinov I.Z. Evrazijskaja integracija i ispytanie ukrainskoj gosudarstvennosti v sisteme mezhdunarodnogo prava // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. − 2014. − # 12.
7. Farhutdinov I.Z. Strategija Mogerini i voennaja doktrina Trampa: predstojashhie vyzovy Rossii // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2016. - # 11.
8. Farhutdinov I.Z. Izrail'skaja doktrina o preventivnoj samooborone i mezhdunarodnoe pravo // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2016. - # 8.
9. Farhutdinov I.Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o primenenii gosudarstvom voennoj sily protiv negosudarstvennyh uchastnikov // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2016. - # 7.
10. Farhutdinov I.Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i doktrina SShA o preventivnoj samooborone // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2016. - # 2.
11. Farhutdinov I.Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o samooborone gosudarstv // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2016. - # 1.
12. Farhutdinov I.Z. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo o principe neprimenenija sily ili ugrozy siloj: istorija i sovremennost' // Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2015. - # 11.
13. Farhutdinov I.Z. Obespechenie mira i bezopasnosti:mezhdunarodno-pravovaja ocenka sobytij v Sirii //Evrazijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. – 2015. # 10.
14. International Crisis Group, In Heavy Waters: Iran’s Nuclear Program, the Risk of War and Lessons from Turkey, Middle East and Europe Report # 11623, February 2012, executive summary.
15. Berkowitz P. Would a Military Strike Against Iran Be Legal? // Real Clear Politics. 2 March 2012.
16. Dershowitz A. Israel Has the Right to Attack Iran’s Nuclear Reactors Now // Huffington Post. (Apr. 16, 2011). [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – Rezhim dostupa: available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com
17. French D., Sekulow J. The Legal Case For Striking Iran // National Review. 6 March 2012.
18. Gill T.D.. The Temporal Dimension of Self-Defense: Anticipation, Pre-emption, Prevention and Immediacy. Chapter 5. // International Law and Armed Conflict: Exploring the Fault lines Essays in Honour of Yoram Dinstein Edited by Michael Schmitt and Jelena Pejic. International Humanitarian Law Series Ninth off Publishers Leiden. Boston, 2007.
19. Gray C. // International Law and the Use of Force, 3rd edition. 2008.
20. Gray C. International Law and the Use of Force. 3rd edition, 2008. R. 212; Elizabeth Wilmshurst. Principles of International Law on the Use of Force by States In Self-Defence, Chatham House Working Paper, October 2005.
21. Greenblatt U.S A. Iran Eye Each Other Warily In Persian Gulf // National Security. February 27, 2012.
22. Greenblum B.M. The Iranian Nuclear Threat: Israel’s options under International Law// Greenblum Eic Edits. 11/16/2006.
23. Heller K. Why Preventive Self-Defense Violates the UN Charter // Opinio Juris blog. 7 March 2012.
24. Iranian Defense Doctrine and Decision Making. The Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya. Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy Institute for Policy and Strategy. Shmuel Bar, 2004.
25. Iran’s Nuclear Program (Nuclear Talks, 2012) // N.Y. TIMES, Updated Nov. 16, 2012. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – Rezhim dostupa: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/ international/countriesandterritories/iran/ nuclear_program/index.html (last visited Feb. 23, 2013) (emphasis added).
26. Kenneth R. Timmerman.Countdown to crisis: the coming nuclear showdown with iran 257 (2005).
27. Linzer D., Leads S. Dead Ends in Nuclear Case Against Iran // WASH. POST. Feb. 8. 2006. at A1, A14.
28. The Osirak Fallacy // The National Interest. Spring 2006.
29. Wallace R., Martin-Ortega O. // International Law, 6th edition. 2009. P. 297-8.
30. Waxman M. The Use of Force Against States that Might Have WMD, Michigan Journal of International Law (2009). Vol. 31. P. 1. [Jelektronnyj resurs]. – Rezhim dostupa: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1511837.
31. Winston N. Craig H. The New Bush National Security Doctrine and the Rule of Law // Berkeley Journal of International Law. Volume 22. Issue 3. Article 3. 2004. R.390-400.
32. Yost D. NATO and the anticipatory use of force // International Affairs 83: 1 (2007).

Eurasian Law Journal

International scientific and practical
law journal.

Contact

16+

Certificate on registration of mass media online edition: No. FC77-67559 of October 31, 2016.

Editor-in-chief and founder: Farkhutdinov Dinar Insurovich

E-mail: info@eurasialaw.ru

Яндекс.Метрика