2023/10/01 by Marko Milanovic, Marko Milanović
Social Sciences · #Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies #Global Peace and Security Dynamics #International Law and Human Rights
paper · pdf · doi:10.1017/ajil.2023.40
crossref issued 2023/10/01 · crossref published 2023/10/01 · crossref published-print 2023/10/01 · openalex publication_date 2023/10/01 · crossref published-online 2023/10/30 · crossref created 2023/10/30 · crossref deposited 2023/10/30 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/07/28 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
Abstract International law prohibits states from intervening in the internal and external affairs of other states, but only if the method of intervention is coercive. This Article argues that coercion can be understood in two different ways or models. First, as coercion-as-extortion, a demand coupled with a threat of harm or the infliction of harm, done to extract some kind of concession from the victim state—in other words, an act targeting the victim state's will or decision-making calculus. Second, as coercion-as-control, an action materially depriving the victim state of its ability to control its sovereign choices. This may be done even through acts like cyber operations that the victim state is entirely unaware of. The Article argues that many of the difficulties surrounding the notion of coercion arise as a consequence of failing to distinguish between these two different models.