Exercise of preemptive legitimate defense in the fight against terrorism

Denying or approving legitimacy. Context and This paper is an attempt to assess preemptive legitimate defense, while examining the legitimacy or illegitimacy of its actions in suppressing terrorism. In addition, the status of pre- emptive legitimate defense after the events of September 11, 2001 with respect to changes in the international system and the reform of the UN in relation to the concepts of legitimate defense are analyzed. This paper is descriptive- analytic and library based. Force by one country against another country is one of the most important measures that governments can adopt in relation to their foreign policy. Bat these kind of actions with in the rules of international law is strictly prohibited, and there are significant consequences for it after two world wars of the twentieth century. The international community tried to establish a new world order in harmony with the UN charter in 1945. So the charter has tried to regulate fundamental aspects of relations between states, such as maintaining international peace and security, recognizing the equal rights of nations, respecting human rights, ruling of law, regulations and restriction on the use of force to protect civilians in time of war. Article 2 (4) on the UN Chater says: “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the united nations.” To expand legitimate defense to potential treats utterly destroys the international peace and security and procedures of the UN repeatedly denies this doctrine.