Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRostow, Nicholas
dc.date2021-11-25T13:35:01.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:52:12Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:52:12Z
dc.date.issued1986-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifieryjil/vol11/iss2/7
dc.identifier.contextkey9357007
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/6165
dc.description.abstractIf readers can ignore the tone adopted by Messrs. Reichler and Wippman in their "rejoinder," they will see that both what the Rejoinder says and what it omits confirm my argument. Messrs. Reichler and Wippman claim that "[w]ith certain important exceptions, Nicaragua and the United States agree on many of the rules governing self-defense under international law."' This statement is correct in general, although I find the formulation of the law by Messrs. Reichler and Wippman to be oversimplified and unsophisticated, particularly with regard to state practice. As a result, our differences are more important than our areas of agreement.
dc.titleNicaragua: A Surreply to a Rejoinder
dc.source.journaltitleYale Journal of International Law
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:52:12Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjil/vol11/iss2/7
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1487&context=yjil&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
24_11YaleJIntlL474_Spring1986_.pdf
Size:
351.3Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record