Abstract/Summary

In Part I of this series, I assessed Israel’s approach to the identification and interpretation of international law in the cyber context, as set forth in an important virtual speech by Israel’s Deputy Attorney General for International Law, Dr. Roy Schöndorf, at the “Disruptive Technologies and International Law” conference hosted by the US Naval War College’s Stockton Center for International Law. I commended that nation for putting international law rules of interpretation front and center in its analysis. I also considered Israel’s understanding of key rules of general international law that lie at the heart of ongoing multilateral discussions in such fora as the UN GGE & OEWG, as well as the broader international law community. In my estimation, Israel has taken a generally cautious approach to these rules, even where one might have expected it to take a broader view. I now turn to two areas of law that are of particular importance to Israel — the jus ad bellum, that body of law governing when states may resort to force as an instrument of their national policy, and the jus in bello (international humanitarian law), which includes the rules that govern how cyber operations may be conducted during armed conflicts.