Also known as: acts of aggression · aggression
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, or political independence of another State or in any other manner inconsistent with the United Nations Charter.
Alexis Archer, commanding State A's border forces, orders troops across the frontier into State B to seize a disputed valley. State B's leaders treat the crossing as an act of aggression and authorize counterforce to repel the incursion. The classification determines whether State B's response qualifies as lawful self-defense under the governing standard.
State A launches airstrikes on State B's military bases after claiming a preemptive need to neutralize an alleged threat. State B denounces the strikes as an act of aggression violating the UN Charter and seeks Security Council condemnation. The classification determines whether State A's action meets the threshold for an unlawful use of force.
State A sends naval vessels to blockade State B's primary port, preventing all commercial shipping. State B's government labels the blockade an act of aggression and appeals to the UN General Assembly for collective measures. The classification governs whether State B may lawfully respond with force in self-defense.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
State A dispatches ground troops to occupy a border region of State B without consent or Security Council authorization. State B characterizes the occupation as an act of aggression and requests international sanctions. The classification controls whether the occupation triggers state responsibility and possible ICC referral.
State A provides weapons and training to irregular forces conducting cross-border raids into State B. State B treats the support as an act of aggression attributable to State A and files a complaint with the Security Council. The classification determines whether State B's countermeasures are proportionate.
Article 8bis lists several acts that qualify regardless of a declaration of war, including invasion or attack by armed forces, military occupation resulting from such invasion, bombardment, and blockade of ports. These examples illustrate the core requirement of armed force used against another state's sovereignty or territorial integrity.
No. The definition requires only the use of armed force by one state against another in a manner inconsistent with the UN Charter. It does not demand a declared war or sustained hostilities.
Only persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or direct the political or military action of a state may be held criminally responsible. The act itself is attributed to the state, but individual liability attaches only to leaders who plan, prepare, initiate, or execute it.
The crime became actionable before the ICC in 2017 after activation by the Assembly of States Parties, with jurisdiction effective from December 2018 for states parties that have not opted out.
…against the strong, security against the exercise of arbitrary power, and absolute safety for free institutions against foreign aggression, and "WHEREAS, The West Virginia State Board of Education maintains that the public schools, established by the legislature of the State of West Virginia under the authority of the…