Maybe you have not engaged with the right int. law lawyers. 😎 n that’s a different topic (self defence against non-state actors). I was commenting on the purpose of force in self defence. But I encourage you to read the article I linked to. Well worth a read for those interested.

? .. You seem to be referring to limitations on the ”imminence” requirement in self defence. The term ”occurs” is taken from art 51 in the UN Charter and has given rise to debate on how imminent an attack must be. That’s beside my comment though. Or is law in general frustrating from the get go?

Indeed, it would. International law does permit force in self defence (ag state) if an armed attack occurs— such as an attack ag military vessels— but the purpose of the force must be to repel the attack. Not to ensure national interest in keeping trade routes open.