The rules related to the applicability of jus ad bellum particularly the right to exercising self-defense has largely remained controversial under international law. The question that has often troubled the international order is with respect to ascertaining what threshold of violence is required before the right to self-defense can be exercised. Within the wider context of the right to self-defense and particularly bearing in mind the twin concepts of ‘necessity’ and ‘proportionality’ that are associated with the use of defensive force, this paper highlights the international concern and debate over the use of defensive force extraterritorially for the purpose of safeguarding one’s nationals. This paper uses examples of State practice to highlight the existing debate on protecting nationals abroad considering the application of both twin requirements of ‘necessity’ and ‘proportionality’ which continue to remain contingent on the facts of each case.