Inadvertent wars, although rare, can be identified in history, and their causes can be explained by analysing prescribed crisis management techniques and the realist security dilemma.
By refusing to ratify the Rome Statue, the US shrinks from its international obligations, disrespects the law of nations, and fails to play a role in advancing international law.
In spite of criticisms of military intervention, such measures can free populations from dictatorships and abusive governments.
The protection of human rights from terrorist threats and the counterterrorism efforts that follow need to be in accordance with human rights standards in order to maintain legitimacy.
A pragmatic approach to Just War Theory is necessary where jus ad bellum is changing, and the blurring of real world situations makes it difficult to decide where jus ad bellum justice lies.
The current human rights framework, while tackling sexual rights, fails to take local contexts into account, thus increasing discrimination and limiting the impact of local activists.
While human rights do challenge state sovereignty, they do so mainly at the conceptual level. In practice their capacity to interfere with states’ domestic affairs is severely limited.
The centuries-old mercenary profession lives on in the modern era, and the current use of private military contractors, while at unprecedented levels, does not signify a new type of war.