Self-Defense Without Overreach: How Status of Forces Agreements Address the Legal Gaps in Article 51

By: Alexis Shaw

PDF: Self-Defense Without Overreach

The United States has increasingly invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter to justify prolonged military engagements, particularly following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. While Article 51 was intended to safeguard states’ right to self- defense, its ambiguity has allowed states—especially the United States—to stretch self-defense claims beyond their limits, applying them to both state and non-state actors. This expansion has raised concerns about sovereignty infringement and legal overreach.

This Note examines the United States's broad interpretation of Article 51 and its contribution to decades-long conflicts and the legitimization of indefinite self-defense claims with minimal international oversight. It proposes expanding Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) to include counterterrorism and use of force provisions, allowing states to pre-authorize military action through mutual agreements rather than rely on unilateral self- defense claims. Incorporating SOFA-based use of force provisions offers a solution that abides by international law and respects sovereignty while preventing Article 51 misuse.