Beyond Tehran and Nairobi: Can Attacks against Embassies Serve as a Basis for the Invocation of Self-defence?

Abstract Forty years have elapsed since the Iran hostage crisis, yet question whether a state can lawfully resort to force in reaction an attack against its diplomatic or consular mission remains unanswered. This issue is subject contradictory scholarly interpretations, whereas self-defence as justification regularly reappears practice. A recent example provided by US position regarding killing of Qasem Soleimani January 2020. article revisits this controversial from empirical perspective, focusing on extensive analysis practice based 730 incidents. Both and theoretical inquiry led authors call into possibility that states may rely such circumstances. Only one has ever invoked attacks embassies, it only did so five occasions, which were all contested international community. In other 725 instances, sending community reacted ways than use force. research also analyses these various responses triggered embassies. Moreover, virtually impossible prove fulfilment necessity proportionality criteria action taken light over last 70 years. Finally, calls for close re-reading Tehran Hostages judgment challenge judgment’s widely accepted interpretation recognizing situations.