Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

The Right of Self-Defence in International Law - A Doctrinal Analysis in the Context of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Svensson, Tilda LU (2025) LAGF03 20252
Faculty of Law
Department of Law
Abstract
This thesis examines Israel's right of self-defence under international law following Hamas' attack on 7 October 2023, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Using a legal-dogmatic method, it analyses Article 51 of the UN Charter, ICJ jurisprudence, and doctrinal sources to deter-mine if Israel's military response was lawful, focusing on the scope of self-defence and the requirements of necessity and proportionality.
The thesis establishes that Hamas' attack, based on coordinated incursions, rocket fire, abductions, and resulting in over 1,200 deaths, qualifies as an armed attack due to its scale and effects, surpassing ICJ thresholds from cases like Nicaragua and Oil Platforms. However, Israel's status as an occupying power... (More)
This thesis examines Israel's right of self-defence under international law following Hamas' attack on 7 October 2023, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Using a legal-dogmatic method, it analyses Article 51 of the UN Charter, ICJ jurisprudence, and doctrinal sources to deter-mine if Israel's military response was lawful, focusing on the scope of self-defence and the requirements of necessity and proportionality.
The thesis establishes that Hamas' attack, based on coordinated incursions, rocket fire, abductions, and resulting in over 1,200 deaths, qualifies as an armed attack due to its scale and effects, surpassing ICJ thresholds from cases like Nicaragua and Oil Platforms. However, Israel's status as an occupying power in Gaza, affirmed by the ICJ, limits this right, as the Pa-lestinian Wall opinion restricts self-defence to inter-state attacks from ex-ternal territories. Criticisms of this view highlight its inadequacy for non-state actors, supported by post-9/11 practice allowing self-defence against terrorism without strict state attribution.
Palestine's legal status is assessed via the Montevideo criteria: it has a permanent population, defined territory, fragmented but functioning government with the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, and capacity to enter into international relations, evidenced by treaty accessions. Recognised by 159 UN states, Palestine likely qualifies as a State, though occupation hinders full independence.
Israel's response, Operation Swords of Iron, involved air and ground assaults and a siege, causing over 34,800 deaths and mass displacement. Necessity is unmet, as force was not a last resort. Statements indicate pu-nitive aims rather than defensive needs. Proportionality fails, as the response exceeded reversing the attack's harm, as expressed in Oil Platforms, even considering broader context.
In conclusion, Israel has an inherent right of self-defence, but occupation constrains it. The response likely violates necessity and proportionality, rendering it unlawful under international law. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats undersöker Israels rätt till självförsvar enligt internationell rätt efter Hamas väpnade attack den 7 oktober 2023, i samband med Israel-Palestina konflikten. Med en rättsdogmatisk metod analyseras artikel 51 i FN-stadgan, ICJ:s rättspraxis och doktrin för att avgöra om Israels militära bemötande av attacken var lagligt, med fokus på självförsvarets omfattning samt kraven på nödvändighet och proportionalitet.
Uppsatsen fastslår att Hamas attack bestående av koordinerade intrång över gränsen, raketbeskjutning, kidnappningar och över 1 200 dödsfall utgör en väpnad attack på grund av dess omfattning och effekter och överstiger därför den uppställda tröskeln från ICJ-fall som Nicaragua och Oil Platforms. Dock begränsas rätten av... (More)
Denna uppsats undersöker Israels rätt till självförsvar enligt internationell rätt efter Hamas väpnade attack den 7 oktober 2023, i samband med Israel-Palestina konflikten. Med en rättsdogmatisk metod analyseras artikel 51 i FN-stadgan, ICJ:s rättspraxis och doktrin för att avgöra om Israels militära bemötande av attacken var lagligt, med fokus på självförsvarets omfattning samt kraven på nödvändighet och proportionalitet.
Uppsatsen fastslår att Hamas attack bestående av koordinerade intrång över gränsen, raketbeskjutning, kidnappningar och över 1 200 dödsfall utgör en väpnad attack på grund av dess omfattning och effekter och överstiger därför den uppställda tröskeln från ICJ-fall som Nicaragua och Oil Platforms. Dock begränsas rätten av Israels status som ockupationsmakt i Gaza, bekräftad av ICJ, eftersom Palestinian Wall-yttrandet begränsar självförsvar till mellanstatliga attacker från externa territorier. Kritik mot denna syn pekar på dess otillräcklighet för icke-statliga aktörer, stödd av praxis efter 9/11 som tillåter självförsvar mot terrorism utan strikt statlig tillskrivning.
Palestinas rättsliga status bedöms via Montevideokriterierna och konstateras ha en permanent befolkning, definierat territorium, fragmenterad men fungerande regering med PA i Västbanken och Hamas i Gaza och förmåga att ingå i internationella relationer, bevisat genom fördragsanslutningar. Erkänt av 159 FN-stater kvalificerar Palestina troligtvis som stat, även om ockupationen hindrar full självständighet.
Israels svar på Hamas attack, Operation Swords of Iron, involverade luft- och markanfall samt belägring, med över 34 800 döda och massfördrivning. Kravet på nödvändighet uppfylls sannolikt inte, då användandet av våld inte var sista utvägen. Uttalanden indikerar straffande syften sna-rare än defensiva behov. Proportionalitet brister, då Israels bemötande at-tack översteg gränsen som framgår i Oil Platforms-fallet genom att inte enbart motverka attackens skada. Detta gäller även med ett bredare perspektiv som utgångspunkt.
Sammanfattningsvis har Israel en inneboende rätt till självförsvar, men ockupationen begränsar den. Israels försvarsattack bryter troligen mot nödvändighet och proportionalitet, vilket gör den olaglig enligt internationell rätt. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Svensson, Tilda LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20252
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Folkrätt, public international law
language
English
id
9217265
date added to LUP
2026-02-09 15:47:50
date last changed
2026-02-09 15:47:50
@misc{9217265,
  abstract     = {{This thesis examines Israel's right of self-defence under international law following Hamas' attack on 7 October 2023, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Using a legal-dogmatic method, it analyses Article 51 of the UN Charter, ICJ jurisprudence, and doctrinal sources to deter-mine if Israel's military response was lawful, focusing on the scope of self-defence and the requirements of necessity and proportionality.
The thesis establishes that Hamas' attack, based on coordinated incursions, rocket fire, abductions, and resulting in over 1,200 deaths, qualifies as an armed attack due to its scale and effects, surpassing ICJ thresholds from cases like Nicaragua and Oil Platforms. However, Israel's status as an occupying power in Gaza, affirmed by the ICJ, limits this right, as the Pa-lestinian Wall opinion restricts self-defence to inter-state attacks from ex-ternal territories. Criticisms of this view highlight its inadequacy for non-state actors, supported by post-9/11 practice allowing self-defence against terrorism without strict state attribution.
Palestine's legal status is assessed via the Montevideo criteria: it has a permanent population, defined territory, fragmented but functioning government with the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, and capacity to enter into international relations, evidenced by treaty accessions. Recognised by 159 UN states, Palestine likely qualifies as a State, though occupation hinders full independence.
Israel's response, Operation Swords of Iron, involved air and ground assaults and a siege, causing over 34,800 deaths and mass displacement. Necessity is unmet, as force was not a last resort. Statements indicate pu-nitive aims rather than defensive needs. Proportionality fails, as the response exceeded reversing the attack's harm, as expressed in Oil Platforms, even considering broader context.
In conclusion, Israel has an inherent right of self-defence, but occupation constrains it. The response likely violates necessity and proportionality, rendering it unlawful under international law.}},
  author       = {{Svensson, Tilda}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{The Right of Self-Defence in International Law - A Doctrinal Analysis in the Context of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}