Reconceptualising the Meaning of Indirect Force

This chapter critically reexamines the traditional conception of indirect force. It aims to determine whether there is a threshold at which an indirect action by a state can be considered to have crossed into an area that constitutes an indirect force prohibited under the Charter regime and customary international law. It also re-evaluates the three parameters—means, effect, and intention—that are mainly used by positivist scholars in analysing the ICJ’s understanding of indirect force. The chapter contends that the current narrow doctrinal framework unexpectedly creates room for the increased use of those indirect positive acts that have been excluded from the definition of indirect force. The states most disadvantaged by this primarily Western view of indirect force are often developing countries, which frequently face proxy wars. This chapter advocates for a broader (yet balanced) approach that includes a constructive knowledge parameter to account for positive indirect acts by offending states that are currently excluded under the traditional framework.