Logo: to the web site of the Swedish Defence University

This thesis examines the legal framework governing reparations for injuries caused by unlawful threats of force under international law. While Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits both the threat and use of force, attention from states and scholars has predominantly focused on the latter, leaving the legal implications of threats comparatively underdeveloped. The study addresses this gap by analysing the extent to which states may be obliged to make reparation for less obvious, indirect, intangible, and temporally remote injuries that may result from prohibited threats of force. By relying on the ILC’s ARSIWA, as well as case law and scholarly literature, the thesis evaluates how the obligation of reparation applies to such injury, with particular emphasis on the requirements of injury and causation. The study demonstrates that, although the obligation of reparation for injuries caused by unlawful threats of force follows as a legal consequence of the wrongful act once attribution and breach are established, uncertainty persists in practice, largely depending on the approach taken in assessing the requisite injury and causation. The absence of clear definitions and the limited judicial reasoning on the application and assessment of these concepts may contribute to uncertainty regarding legal outcomes and, in turn, to the unpredictability of reparations for unlawful threats of force. The findings suggest that a more flexible, context-sensitive approach to causation better accommodates the diverse and often indirect effects of unlawful threats of force. Furthermore, a more transparent, developed, and explicit articulation of causation assessments by judicial bodies could contribute to an enhanced understanding of the concept’s significance and strengthen legal certainty.