This article challenges the effectiveness of the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model that is centred on a decidedly narrow selection of relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations (UN Charter). In the now seventy-five years of the UN Charter era, predominant modes of armed conflict have evolved so as to be largely unrecognizable when compared to the model of war that was contemplated when negotiating and ratifying the Charter. Nonetheless, modes of engaging with an actual or contemplated use of force remain rooted in a model developed more than seven decades ago. This article suggests that a new frame of analysis is needed. The “Reframer” approach and “Purposes and Principles” model developed herein remain just as firmly grounded in the UN Charter as the prevailing interpretation. However, this novel approach and model incorporate a degree of nuance and adaptiveness that is not feasible when applying the prevailing interpretation of the contemporary use of force model.
