# Contested concept: defence

_**What you are reading**: one contested-concept page in Deliberus's deliberation graph. Deliberus maps human reasoning — including claims that are contested, mistaken, or extreme — so that disagreement can be examined precisely. A claim's presence here is not an endorsement: the graph records that someone argued it, how it connects to other reasoning, and how far scrutiny has gotten. The metadata on this page describes the state of that scrutiny, not the truth of the claim._

---

- **Contestedness**: semantic
- **Diagnosis**: The text draws the distinction explicitly, and it is the mechanism by which a protective entitlement is conceded while a legal characterisation is denied.
- **Canonical**: `/concept/defence` (data: `/concept/defence.json`)

## Senses in use
- **The legal doctrine of self-defence under Article 51, which an occupant may not invoke** — used in 2 claim(s)
- **Ordinary-language protective action, which a state may take** — used in 1 claim(s)

## Claims using this term
- [Israel can defend itself, but its defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defence in international…](/claim/claim_2ba557193487.md) _(sense: The legal doctrine of self-defence under Article 51, which an occupant may not invoke)_
- [As long as the occupation continues, Israel has the right to protect itself and its citizens from attacks by Palestinians who reside in the…](/claim/claim_6400b2ee34d1.md) _(sense: Ordinary-language protective action, which a state may take)_
- [In law, self-defence refers to a complex doctrine with a much more restricted scope than ordinary notions of defence, just as negligence do…](/claim/claim_d90b2aa60260.md) _(sense: The legal doctrine of self-defence under Article 51, which an occupant may not invoke)_