This paper is concerned with the "paradox" of international law of belligerent occupation: the coexistence of the two seemingly opposite ideas of preservation of status quo during belligerent occupations, and the urge to transform the occupied society during belligerent occupation. The paper examines the historical development of the two ideas in international law of belligerent occupation, traces state praxis, and doctrinal disputes relating to their coexistence. Finally the paper asks the question of how come the disputes and discussions remains the same throughout the history of international law of belligerent occupation. Is there perhaps something structuring international law and international legal doctrine relating to belligerent occupations, something which remains hidden, and indeed forgotten by international law and its actors? Might this be the answer to the perpetual, and seemingly helpless, recycling of arguments pro and against status quo and transformation during belligerent occupation?
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/matilda_arvidsson/27/