Maritime militias in international law: state actors or private actors

Maritime militias, increasingly institutionalized by states as hybrid entities, blur the traditional demarcation between state and non-state actors. However, international law lacks explicit regulations for these “soldier-civilian” collectives. Existing analyzes primarily invoke the UNCLOS in peacetime, international humanitarian law during armed conflict, and the ARSIWA. Functioning as state actors under government control, maritime militias predominantly conduct law enforcement and quasi-military operations, with their state responsibilities firmly rooted in domestic legal mandates. Conversely, as private actors, they largely engage in routine fishing, voluntary safeguarding of maritime rights, and wartime civilian assistance. A balanced legal framework is imperative, as these entities simultaneously mitigate escalation risks while generating ambiguities in attributing responsibility. To address this duality, future international legal developments should adopt a comprehensive approach that not only rigorously defines internationally wrongful acts under both peacetime and wartime conditions, but also implies permission for some actions in the absence of explicit legal prohibitions. Consequently, it would leverage non-state actors’ potential as soft power to mitigate conflict threats, avoid new legal risks, and promote the evolution of the global legal system.