The law of neutrality - the corpus of legal rules regulating the relationship between belligerents and States taking no part in hostilities - assumed its modern form in a world in which the waging of war was unconstrained. The neutral State enjoyed territorial inviolability to the extent that it adhered to the obligations attaching to its neutral status and thus the law of neutrality provided spatial parameters for the conduct of hostilities. Yet the basis on which the law of neutrality developed - the extra-legal character of war - no longer exists. Does the law of neutrality continue to survive in the modern era? If so, how has it been modified by the profound changes in the law on the use of force and the law of armed conflict? This book argues that neutrality endures as a key concept of the law of armed conflict. The interaction between belligerent and nonbelligerent States continues to require legal regulation, as demonstrated by a number of recent conflicts, including the Iraq War of 2003 and the Mavi Marmara incident of 2010. By detailing the rights and duties of neutral states and demonstrating how the rules of neutrality continue to apply in modern day conflicts, this restatement of law of neutrality will be a useful guide to legal academics working on the law of armed conflict, the law on the use of force, and the history of international law, as well as for government and military lawyers seeking comprehensive guidance in this difficult area of the law.

Neutrality is a legal relationship between a belligerent State and a State not participating in a war, namely a neutral State. The law of neutrality is a body of rules and principles that regulates the legal relations of neutrality. The law of neutrality obliges neutral States to treat all belligerent States impartially and to abstain from providing military and other assistance to belligerents. The law of neutrality is a branch of international law that developed in the nineteenth century, when international law allowed unlimited freedom of sovereign States to resort to war. Thus, there has been much debate as to whether such a branch of law remains valid in modern international law, which generally prohibits war and the use of force by States. While there has been much debate regarding the current status of neutrality in modern international law, there is a general agreement among scholars as to the basic features of the traditional law of neutrality. Wani challenges the conventional understanding of the traditional neutrality by re-examining the historical development of the law of neutrality from the sixteenth century to 1945. The modification of the conventional understanding will provide a fundamentally new framework for discussing the current status of neutrality in modern international law.

Now available as an ebook for the first time, this 2000 title in the Melland Schill Studies in International Law series is a survey of the history of law of neutrality from its mediaeval roots to the end of the twentieth century. The theme is the eternal clash between the rights of neutrals and belligerents - between the right of belligerents to defeat their enemies, and the right of neutrals to trade freely with all parties. Over the centuries, belligerent powers have devised various legal means of restricting neutrals from trading with their enemies, such as the law of blockade and contraband carriage. At the same time, neutral traders have done their best to evade and circumvent these restrictions. This book traces the evolution of state practice, together with the debates over the relevant doctrinal issues and the various attempts to reform and codify the law of neutrality.

In A Scrap of Paper, Isabel V. Hull compares wartime decision making in Germany, Great Britain, and France, weighing the impact of legal considerations in each. She demonstrates how differences in state structures and legal traditions shaped the way the three belligerents fought the war. Hull focuses on seven cases: Belgian neutrality, the land war in the west, the occupation of enemy territory, the blockade, unrestricted submarine warfare, the introduction of new weaponry, and reprisals. A Scrap of Paper reconstructs the debates over military decision-making and clarifies the role law played—where it constrained action, where it was manipulated, where it was ignored, and how it developed in combat—in each case. A Scrap of Paper is a passionate defense of the role that the law must play to govern interstate relations in both peace and war.

Non participation in armed conflict gives rise to the relevance, role and content of the law of neutrality in contemporary international law. Despite scholarly opinion to the contrary the challenges posed by collective security and the prohibition of the use of force have not made neutrality obsolete. The validity of the law of neutrality is reaffirmed in State practice, mainly in the form of national military manuals, and the case-law of international tribunals. The legal framework of neutrality remains unchanged with respect to most rules. At the same time, it has been adapted to the evolution of the law of the sea as a result of the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention, the globalization of trade and the use of cyberspace in armed conflict. This has been achieved mainly through soft law documents and national military manuals. Neutrality, however, remains inapplicable in non-international armed conflict.

The essays in this collection cover not only multiple countries, but also multiple aspects of the concept of neutrality: political, economic, cultural and legal. These case studies have led to a re-evaluation of the notion of neutrality, and the role of neutrals, during the First World War, making this collection of great value to all scholars of neutrality, the history of individual neutral countries, and of the war itself.