451 denmark’s position paper in each case to determine whether the scale and effects of a cyber operation correspond to what would qualify as use of force had they resulted from conventional weapons. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter sets out that all Member States 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. Numerous other international documents and State practice contribute to the understanding of the principle of the non-use of force. It is, however, fair to assert that there are still significant grey areas and divergent views among States as to the precise content of the law. Generally, Denmark subscribes to the notion that where a cyber operation results in injury, death, or significant physical damage, this prima facie qualifies as use of force. With regard to the precise interpretation of the term force and the question as to whether economic or political coercion can qualify as use of force, Denmark considers that it generally cannot be ruled out that acts of economic or political coercion can fall within the purview of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter if, for example, a cyber operation resulting in the malfunctioning of a State’s financial system leads to significant economic damage. It has been suggested that States should apply the following non-exhaustive factors for determining if a cyber operation reaches the level of use of force: Severity, immediacy, directness, invasiveness, measurability of effects, military character, State involvement, presumptive legality.5 While few States in their public positions have endorsed these particular factors, Denmark is of the view that these factors are useful reference points for further understanding and discussing the definition of use of force in cyberspace. In certain instances, use of force may due to its scale and effects reach the level of an armed attack and thus give rise to a right to self-defence of the target State, cf. article 51 of the UN Charter. In its Nicaragua judgment the ICJ defined an armed attack as the most grave form of the use of force.6 Denmark subscribes to the understanding that not all illegal use of force under article 2(4) of the UN Charter necessarily amounts to an armed attack under article 51 of the Charter. Denmark takes the view that a cyber attack may qualify as an armed attack under article 51 of the UN Charter if the effects generated are comparable to 5 M. N. Schmitt (ed.), Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable To Cyber Operations, (Cambridge University Press, 2017), pp. 334-336. 6 Nicaragua v. United States of America case, supra note 1, para. 191. Downloaded from Brill.com 03/27/2024 10:42:51AM distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ via Open Access. This is an open access article Nordic Journal of International Law 92 (2023) 446–455