The Discourse of Proportionality and the Use of Force: International Law and the Power of Definition

Foregrounding standards like ‘proportionality’ and ‘necessity’ have come to assume a central place in the international legal vocabulary for assessing the legitimacy of war. In both ethical and practical terms, the shift towards common standards provides a useful vernacular to assess military operations. But the question remains: how should these terms be interpreted and applied and by whom? Simultaneously, debates over the definitional boundaries of the legal concept of war and its attendant categories (e.g. lawful military objects, protected zones, combatants, civilians) have arisen in many contexts, leaving room for different and conflicting interpretations, often to the detriment of marginalised groups and weaker States. This article examines the ambivalences, complexities and contestations that have arisen in the move towards broader and subjective discourses of law and war, through the lens of proportionality.