Re-Assessing the Use of Indirect Force by ‘Third States’ in Civil Wars

This chapter examines a critique of the jus ad bellum rules as they apply to civil wars. This chapter discusses the theories of counterintervention, self-determination, and recognition used to justify indirect force by third states in civil wars. The initial premise is that these justifications are extra-legal arguments within the framework of the Charter regime. It investigates whether customary international law has evolved to accept these extra-legal arguments by analysing specific cases, such as the Spanish Civil War (1936), the Chad Civil War (1969), and more recently, the 2011 Libyan and Syrian civil wars, respectively, where these justifications have been invoked by states and are often cited in mainstream legal scholarship to support these theories. This chapter questions the legality and legitimacy of these theories, arguing that they are predominantly Western and disadvantage developing countries.