Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Regulations on Espionage in International Law

Year 2025, Volume: 21 Issue: 51, 299 - 319, 25.08.2025
https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1672790

Abstract

Although espionage is widely practiced, it remains legally ambiguous under international law. This study comparatively examines the legal status of espionage in times of war and peace; it outlines how the law of armed conflict defines and limits espionage through its foundational legal sources and then discusses the normative gaps arising from the absence of a clear international framework regulating espionage activities in peacetime. In this context, the study identifies the distinctions between espionage and general intelligence activities, analyzes wartime legal instruments (such as the Lieber Code and the Hague and Geneva Conventions), evaluates various views on the legality of espionage in peacetime, and assesses its practical dimensions through case studies such as the U-2 Crisis, the Eli Cohen incident, and the Stuxnet attack. The lack of a binding international regulation on peacetime espionage has perpetuated its status as a legally grey area, reflecting a delicate tension between state security interests and the fundamental principles of international law.

References

  • ALBAYRAK Gökhan (2015). “Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Casusluk ve Siber İstihbarat”, Güncel Hukuk, 26-31.
  • AMER Nabih (2024). “Espionage Activities in the Perspective of International Law”, Journal of Law Science, 6:1, 110-117.
  • BAEZNER Marie ve ROBIN Patrice (2017). “Stuxnet”, Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich.
  • BAKER Christopher D. (2003). “Tolerance of International Espionage: A Functional Approach”, American University International Law Review, 19:4, 1091-1113.
  • BEIM Jared (2018). “Enforcing a Prohibition on International Espionage”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 18:2, 647-672.
  • BUCHAN Russell (2016). “The International Legal Regulation of State-Sponsored Cyber Espionage”, Anna-Maria Osula ve Henry Rõigas (ed.), International Cyber Norms: Legal, Policy & Industry Perspectives, NATO CCD COE Publications, Tallinn, 65-86.
  • DEMAREST Geoffrey B. (1996). “Espionage in International Law”, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 24:2, 321-348.
  • DOST Süleyman (2018). “Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukukta Hainlik Yasağı, Meşru Savaş Hileleri ve Casusluk”, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 8:1, 27-55.
  • FALK Richard A. (1962). “Space Espionage and World Order: A Consideration of the Samos-Midas Program”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 45-82.
  • FALK Richard A. (1962). “Foreword”, Roland J. Stanger (Ed), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, v-x.
  • GROTIUS Hugo, Savaş ve Barış Hukuku, III. Kitap, IV. Bölüm, XVIII. Başlık, çeşitli baskılar.
  • INTERNATIONAL Court of Justice (ICJ) (1986). Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, s. 14.
  • INTERNATIONAL Court of Justice (ICJ) (1996). Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 8 July 1996, I.C.J. Reports 1996.
  • KERR Paul K. ROLLINS John ve THEOHARY Catherine A. (2010). “The Stuxnet Computer Worm: Harbinger of an Emerging Warfare Capability”, CRS Report for Congress.
  • LUBIN Lubin (2016). “Espionage as a Sovereign Right under International Law and Its Limits”, ILSA Quarterly, 24:3, 22-28.
  • NAVARRETE Inaki ve BUCHAN Russell (2019). “Out of the Legal Wilderness: Peacetime Espionage, International Law and the Existence of Customary Exceptions”, Cornell International Law Journal, 51:4, 897-953.
  • NİZAMÜ’L MÜLK, Siyasetname, On Üçüncü Fasıl, “Casusları Sevk ve İdare, Mülkün Selameti ve Raiyyetin İşlerine Dair”, çeşitli baskılar.
  • PERMANENT Court of International Justice (PCIJ) (1927). The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (France v. Turkey), Judgment of 7 September 1927, PCIJ Series A, No. 10.
  • PERMANENT Court of International Justice (PCIJ) (1937). “Diversion of Water from the Meuse, Judgment, Individual Opinion by Mr. Hudson, 28 June 1937”.
  • PUN Darien (2017). “Rethinking Espionage in the Modern Era”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 18:1, 353-391.
  • RADSAN A. John (2007). “The Unresolved Equation of Espionage and International Law”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 28, 595-623.
  • SAMİ Binbaşı (1928). Casuslardan Korunma, Halk Matbaası, İstanbul.
  • STANGER Roland J. (1962). “Espionage and Arms Control”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 83-101.
  • STONE Julius (1962). “Legal Problems of Espionage in Conditions of Modern Conflict”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 29-43.
  • WRIGHT Quincy (1960). “Legal Aspects of the U-2 Incident”, The American Journal of International Law, 54:4, 836-854.
  • WRIGHT Quincy (1962). “Espionage and the Doctrine of Non-Intervention in Internal Affairs”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 3-28.
  • “CONVENTION (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 29 July 1899”, https://ihl-databases. icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-ii-1899, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “CONVENTION (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “CONVENTION (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907”, https://ihldatabases. icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-iv-1907, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “ELI Cohen | Israeli Spy | Britannica”, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eli-Cohen, erişim 08.04.2025.
  • “ELI Cohen”, (Çevrimiçi) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/eli-cohen, erişim: 06.03.2025. “INSTRUCTIONS for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field (Lieber Code). 24 April 1863.”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/liebercode-1863 erişim 01.04.2025.
  • “İSTİHBARAT”, (Çevrimiçi) https://www.mit.gov.tr/sozluk.html#İ erişim: 17.06.2025. “PROJECT of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War. Brussels, 27 August 1874” (1874) (Çevrimiçi) https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/brussels-decl-1874 erişim 28.02.2025.
  • “PROTOCOL Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ ihl-treaties/api-1977, erişim 09.04.2025.
  • “PROTOCOLS Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949”, https://www.icrc.org/sites/ default/files/external/doc/en/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0321.pdf, erişim 09.04.2025.
  • COPPINS McKay (2010). “Spies Among Us: Modern-Day Espionage”, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek. com/spies-among-us-modern-day-espionage-74521, erişim 06.03.2025.

Uluslararası Hukukta Casusluk Düzenlemeleri

Year 2025, Volume: 21 Issue: 51, 299 - 319, 25.08.2025
https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1672790

Abstract

Uluslararası hukukta casusluk, yaygın bir uygulama alanına sahip olmasına rağmen hukuki açıdan belirsizliğini korumaktadır. Bu çalışma, casusluğun savaş ve barış zamanlarındaki hukuki statüsünü karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemekte; silahlı çatışma hukukunun casusluğu nasıl tanımlayıp sınırladığını temel kaynaklar üzerinden ortaya koymakta ve barış zamanında yürütülen casusluk faaliyetlerinin açık bir uluslararası düzenlemeye tabi olmamasından kaynaklanan normatif boşlukları tartışmaktadır. Bu çerçevede, çalışmada casusluk ile genel istihbarat faaliyetleri arasındaki farklar açıklanmış; savaş zamanına ilişkin düzenlemeler (Lieber Kodu, Lahey ve Cenevre Sözleşmeleri vb.) ile barış zamanı casusluğun hukukiliğine dair görüşler değerlendirilmiş ve U-2 Krizi, Eli Cohen vakası ile Stuxnet saldırısı örnek olayları üzerinden konunun pratik boyutları analiz edilmiştir. Barış zamanı casusluğa ilişkin açık ve bağlayıcı bir uluslararası düzenlemenin bulunmaması, casusluk faaliyetlerinin, devletlerin güvenlik kaygıları ile uluslararası hukukun temel ilkeleri arasında hassas bir denge arayışına işaret eden, hukuki açıdan gri bir alan olarak varlığını sürdürmesine yol açmaktadır.

References

  • ALBAYRAK Gökhan (2015). “Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Casusluk ve Siber İstihbarat”, Güncel Hukuk, 26-31.
  • AMER Nabih (2024). “Espionage Activities in the Perspective of International Law”, Journal of Law Science, 6:1, 110-117.
  • BAEZNER Marie ve ROBIN Patrice (2017). “Stuxnet”, Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich.
  • BAKER Christopher D. (2003). “Tolerance of International Espionage: A Functional Approach”, American University International Law Review, 19:4, 1091-1113.
  • BEIM Jared (2018). “Enforcing a Prohibition on International Espionage”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 18:2, 647-672.
  • BUCHAN Russell (2016). “The International Legal Regulation of State-Sponsored Cyber Espionage”, Anna-Maria Osula ve Henry Rõigas (ed.), International Cyber Norms: Legal, Policy & Industry Perspectives, NATO CCD COE Publications, Tallinn, 65-86.
  • DEMAREST Geoffrey B. (1996). “Espionage in International Law”, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 24:2, 321-348.
  • DOST Süleyman (2018). “Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukukta Hainlik Yasağı, Meşru Savaş Hileleri ve Casusluk”, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 8:1, 27-55.
  • FALK Richard A. (1962). “Space Espionage and World Order: A Consideration of the Samos-Midas Program”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 45-82.
  • FALK Richard A. (1962). “Foreword”, Roland J. Stanger (Ed), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, v-x.
  • GROTIUS Hugo, Savaş ve Barış Hukuku, III. Kitap, IV. Bölüm, XVIII. Başlık, çeşitli baskılar.
  • INTERNATIONAL Court of Justice (ICJ) (1986). Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, s. 14.
  • INTERNATIONAL Court of Justice (ICJ) (1996). Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 8 July 1996, I.C.J. Reports 1996.
  • KERR Paul K. ROLLINS John ve THEOHARY Catherine A. (2010). “The Stuxnet Computer Worm: Harbinger of an Emerging Warfare Capability”, CRS Report for Congress.
  • LUBIN Lubin (2016). “Espionage as a Sovereign Right under International Law and Its Limits”, ILSA Quarterly, 24:3, 22-28.
  • NAVARRETE Inaki ve BUCHAN Russell (2019). “Out of the Legal Wilderness: Peacetime Espionage, International Law and the Existence of Customary Exceptions”, Cornell International Law Journal, 51:4, 897-953.
  • NİZAMÜ’L MÜLK, Siyasetname, On Üçüncü Fasıl, “Casusları Sevk ve İdare, Mülkün Selameti ve Raiyyetin İşlerine Dair”, çeşitli baskılar.
  • PERMANENT Court of International Justice (PCIJ) (1927). The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (France v. Turkey), Judgment of 7 September 1927, PCIJ Series A, No. 10.
  • PERMANENT Court of International Justice (PCIJ) (1937). “Diversion of Water from the Meuse, Judgment, Individual Opinion by Mr. Hudson, 28 June 1937”.
  • PUN Darien (2017). “Rethinking Espionage in the Modern Era”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 18:1, 353-391.
  • RADSAN A. John (2007). “The Unresolved Equation of Espionage and International Law”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 28, 595-623.
  • SAMİ Binbaşı (1928). Casuslardan Korunma, Halk Matbaası, İstanbul.
  • STANGER Roland J. (1962). “Espionage and Arms Control”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 83-101.
  • STONE Julius (1962). “Legal Problems of Espionage in Conditions of Modern Conflict”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 29-43.
  • WRIGHT Quincy (1960). “Legal Aspects of the U-2 Incident”, The American Journal of International Law, 54:4, 836-854.
  • WRIGHT Quincy (1962). “Espionage and the Doctrine of Non-Intervention in Internal Affairs”, Roland J. Stanger (ed.), Essays on Espionage and International Law, Ohio State University Press, Athens, OH, 3-28.
  • “CONVENTION (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 29 July 1899”, https://ihl-databases. icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-ii-1899, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “CONVENTION (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “CONVENTION (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907”, https://ihldatabases. icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-iv-1907, erişim 12.03.2025.
  • “ELI Cohen | Israeli Spy | Britannica”, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eli-Cohen, erişim 08.04.2025.
  • “ELI Cohen”, (Çevrimiçi) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/eli-cohen, erişim: 06.03.2025. “INSTRUCTIONS for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field (Lieber Code). 24 April 1863.”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/liebercode-1863 erişim 01.04.2025.
  • “İSTİHBARAT”, (Çevrimiçi) https://www.mit.gov.tr/sozluk.html#İ erişim: 17.06.2025. “PROJECT of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War. Brussels, 27 August 1874” (1874) (Çevrimiçi) https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/brussels-decl-1874 erişim 28.02.2025.
  • “PROTOCOL Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977”, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ ihl-treaties/api-1977, erişim 09.04.2025.
  • “PROTOCOLS Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949”, https://www.icrc.org/sites/ default/files/external/doc/en/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0321.pdf, erişim 09.04.2025.
  • COPPINS McKay (2010). “Spies Among Us: Modern-Day Espionage”, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek. com/spies-among-us-modern-day-espionage-74521, erişim 06.03.2025.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects International Security, International Law
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Muhammed Enes Bayrak 0000-0003-2635-8871

Publication Date August 25, 2025
Submission Date April 9, 2025
Acceptance Date August 15, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 21 Issue: 51

Cite

Chicago Bayrak, Muhammed Enes. “Uluslararası Hukukta Casusluk Düzenlemeleri”. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi 21, no. 51 (August 2025): 299-319. https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1672790.