This Master's thesis investigates the factors for contestation of internalized international norms, specifically the right of self-defence of the state by international actors. It is based on constructivist theory and within it on the concept of the norm life cycle model and norm contestation. Norms are not external rules, but are created and changed through the interactions between actors and thus co-create social reality. The norm life cycle model provides a good basis for exploring norms, but it lacks insight into the development of norms after internalization and should be complemented by norm contestation theory. The development of the international norm of the right of self-defence has taken place in four stages, from origin, legalization, internalization to redefinition and contestation. The latter results in loose criteria for its application and the possibility for states to make a subjective assessment of the application of the right depending on the context. The qualitative study of the empirical cases of the Indian military operation Bandar and the Israeli military operation Guardian of the Walls and their comparison has highlighted several common points in the exercise of the right of self-defence by states and has also helped to identify seven factors that lead states to challenge international norms. It has shown that the norm life cycle model complemented by norm contestation theory is applicable beyond abstract frameworks and offers a deeper understanding of the dynamics of international norms.
|
