Threats to state survival as emergencies in international law by Dill, J

“…<p>Does international law restrict the use of force by states in self-defense even when their survival is threatened? …”

Should International Law Ensure the Moral Acceptability of War? by Dill, J

“…Jeff McMahan's challenge to conventional just-war theory is an attempt to apply to the use of force between states a moral standard whose pertinence to international relations (IR) is decreasingly contestable and the regulation of which international law (IL) is, therefore, under pressure to afford: the preservation of individual rights. …”

Attitudes toward the use of force: Instrumental imperatives, moral principles, and international law by Dill, J, Schubiger, LI

“…Although all logics have some resonance, we find that respondents' preferences are remarkably consistent with several core demands of international law even though respondents are not told that the legality of the use of force is at stake. …”

The definition of a legitimate target in US air warfare: a normative enquiry into the effectiveness of international law in the conduct of hostilities by Dill, J

Subjects: “…Criminal Law ? Public international law…”

The 21st-century belligerent’s trilemma by Dill, J

“…The logics of sufficiency, efficiency and moral liability differently distribute the harm and destruction that waging war inevitably causes. International law demands belligerents follow the logic of sufficiency. …”

Do attackers have a legal duty of care? Limits to the ‘individualization of war’ by Dill, J

“…As the individual, not the state, is the ultimate locus of moral value, this norm shift in international relations, and the corresponding developments in international law, are morally desirable. When it comes to IHL, the goal of protecting the interests of the individual creates strong reasons both for and against imposing a legal duty of care on the attacker. …”

The role of distinction, necessity and proportionality in Afghan civilians' attitudes towards wartime harm by Dill, J

“…The principle of proportionality, which requires that civilian casualties are caused in pursuit of a legitimate war aim, informed their abstract attitudes toward civilian casualties in Afghanistan. Two rules of international law, which accord with the moral principles of distinction and necessity, were reflected in the civilians’ attitudes. …”