Analyzing the Salisbury Incident Under International Law

Abstract

On March 04, 2018, Sergei Skripal (former Russian spy) and his daughter, Yulia Skripal, were found unconscious in Salisbury in the United Kingdom. An investigation by the authorities found that Skripal and his daughter had been exposed to Novichok nerve agent. The UK Government claimed it was highly likely that the Russian government was responsible for the poisoning. The Russian government dismissed the allegations. Nonetheless, the Salisbury case has become an international crisis. This case has been analyzed in the context of various international legal principles, including prohibition of the use of force, self-defense, and armed attack. The prohibition of the use of force, for example, requires an examination of the compatibility of nerve agent use (in particular Novichok nerve agent) with international law. In the Salisbury incident, one important question is whether there is a threshold for the use of force in respect of Article 2(4) of the United Nations (UN) Charter. Assuming the Russian government is responsible for the Salisbury incident, another crucial issue is whether the Salisbury incident is tantamount to an armed attack for the purposes of Article 51 of the UN Charter, invoking the UK's right to forcible self-defense.