Understanding the Doctrine of Contagion in International Law
Definition & Meaning
The doctrine of contagion in international law refers to the principle that a country may justify invading or overthrowing the government of a neighboring state if that state engages in practices deemed abhorrent, such as severe human rights violations or revolutions. Historically, this doctrine was applied by the Holy Alliance in Europe during the 19th century to intervene in countries experiencing political upheaval. Although this doctrine is not actively enforced today, it serves as a significant point of discussion in the context of international relations and humanitarian interventions.
Legal Use & context
The doctrine of contagion is primarily discussed within the realms of international law and relations. It is relevant in cases involving:
- Humanitarian interventions
- Justifications for military actions
- International treaties and alliances
While this doctrine is not commonly invoked in modern legal practice, understanding its implications can be useful for those studying international law or involved in diplomatic relations. Users can explore legal templates related to international agreements and humanitarian law through US Legal Forms.
Real-world examples
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
One historical example of the doctrine of contagion in action is the intervention by the Holy Alliance in the early 19th century. They justified military actions in Spain and other countries experiencing revolutions, arguing that these upheavals could spread and threaten stability across Europe.
(hypothetical example) A country may consider intervening in a neighboring state where reports of genocide are emerging, claiming that failure to act could lead to wider regional instability.