Note: Is an Obligation Assumed by Two Different States in Two Different Treaties Binding Between Them?

Cf., D. Dicke, ‘The Heleanna Case and International Lawmaking Treaties: A New Form of Conclusion of a Treaty?’, 69 AJIL (1975) pp. 624–628. Cf., D. Ciobanu, ‘The Flag Law Revisited: The Heleanna Case’, 12 RBDI (1976) pp. 166–171. Dicke, loc. cit. n. 1, at p. 628. Ciobanu, loc. cit. n. 2, at pp. 167–168. GAOR, 47th Session, Suppl. No. 27, pp. 107 et seq. League of Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 94, pp. 65 et seq. See also the relation between the Red-Cross Conventions of 1864 and 1906: P. Fauchille and N. Politis, Manuel de la Croix-Rouge (Paris, Société française d’imprimerie et de librairie 1908) p. 13. See especially Art. 44 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). See ICJ Rep. (1951) pp. 15 et seq. See ICJ Rep. (1971) pp. 31–33. See the description and criticism by P. Weil, in 237 RCADI (1992-VI) pp. 160 et seq. The reason for their non-participation in the Briand-Kellogg Pact of 1928 were certain reservations of the government of the US with respect to the Monroe Doctrine, not appreciated by these Latin-American states. See I. Brownlie, International Law and the Use of Force by States (Oxford, Oxford University Press 1963) pp. 110–111. But the reservations to boths texts were not identical. See, e.g., the Case Concerning Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia (Merits), PCIJ, Ser. A, No. 7, p. 29: ‘A treaty only creates law as between the States which are parties to it...’ On the point, see, e.g., R. Jennings and A. Watts, eds, Oppenheim’s International Law, Vol. I, 9th edn. (London, Longman 1992) pp. 1260 et seq. See also infra 4. On the operation of this principle, see R. Kolb, La bonne foi en droit international public (Paris, Presses universitaires de France 2000). See supra 2.2.