Crossing Borders to Target Al-Qaeda and Its Affiliates: Defining Networks as Organized Armed Groups in Non-International Armed Conflicts

2014 ◽  
pp. 319-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Margulies ◽  
Matthew Sinnot
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Armed Groups

Love and Jihad. Female Trajectories from North Caucasus to the Islamic State

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-151
Author(s):  
Denis Sokolov
Keyword(s):  
Muslim Women ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
North Caucasus ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
The North ◽  
Caucasian Women

In the 2000s, Al-Qaeda, represented by the Caucasus Emirate, took over the first Chechen resistance, as well as local Islamist armed groups in Dagestan and other republics of the North Caucasus. However, a decade later, the Islamic State won the competition with Al-Qaeda, by including the involvement of women in its project. Hundreds of Russian-speaking Muslim women followed men to live by the rules of Islam. Some joined their husbands or children. Others travelled to the Islamic State in pursuit of love and romance with future husbands they had met on the internet. Based on exclusive interviews done with women detained in the Roj detention camp in the Kurdish territories in northeastern Syria near the Iraqi border, this article analyzes some of the trajectories that has pushed young North Caucasian women to the Syrian war theater in the name of love.

scholarly journals The Role of Customary International Law in Regulating the Activities of Armed Groups in the Field of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 195-204
Author(s):  
R. I. Sharipov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Peremptory Norms

Over the past decades, there has been a significant increase in the number of armed groups involved in armed conflicts around the world, as well as in their impact on the rights and freedoms of the population under their control. Facing various situations of systematic violations of human rights by non-state actors, experts in the field of international human rights law began to consider the theoretical justification for the mandatory nature of the provisions on the observance and protection of human rights for armed groups. In this regard, a number of scholars have turned to the theory of customary international law, the acceptability of which is being investigated by the author of this paper. The author examines the provisions underlying this theory and the persuasiveness of the argumentation used by its supporters. Based on an analysis of the nature of customary international law, its structural elements, their interpretation by the UN International Court of Justice in its decisions and the relationship of customary international law with peremptory norms of jus cogens, the author concludes that the theory under consideration is currently unable to explain the existence of obligations of armed groups in the field of human rights.

Human Rights Obligations of Armed Groups

2019 ◽  
pp. 444-462
Author(s):  
Andreas Th Müller
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Potential Application ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
The Past ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
State Actors

One of the asymmetries faced by military missions in areas of limited statehood are diverging legal obligations of state and non-state actors, in particular in relation to human rights duties. From a perspective of states bound by human rights treaties, there is a certain danger that armed groups opposing them might abuse the obligations incumbent upon state actors. Against this perception, the potential application of human rights law to armed groups is not only relevant as a tool for protecting civilians but also from a reciprocity perspective in view of the fluidity of armed conflicts and with a view to convergence of standards. The chapter assesses how international law and international legal practice in relation to armed groups have evolved over the past decade. It takes stock of recent developments and analyses the degree to which human rights obligations apply to armed groups.

Woolsey’s Snakes

2020 ◽  
pp. 66-114
Author(s):  
David Kilcullen
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Fitness Landscape ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Operating Environment ◽  
Evolutionary Processes ◽  
Evolutionary Concepts

This chapter applies the evolutionary concepts explained in Chapter 2 to a series of case studies of nonstate adversaries. It explores how specific nonstate adversaries have adapted and evolved since 1993; these include Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and the Lebanese Shi’a group Hezbollah. The chapter shows that each of these irregular armed groups, despite differences of ideology, origin, operating environment and structure, are all responding in their own ways to a fitness landscape created by Western dominance of a particular, narrow, technology-centric form of warfare. Their patterns of adaptation indicate the ways in which evolutionary processes identified in the previous chapter have played out in practice.

The Definition of Civilians in Non-International Armed Conflicts

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Marquis Bissonnette
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Direct Participation ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Shed Light

This article analyzes the perceptions of armed groups regarding the concept of civilians in non-international armed conflicts, through their codes of conduct and other commitments. It intends to shed light on the implementation by these non-state actors of the very critical principle of distinction, the exact articulation of is hotly debated in non-international armed conflict. It thus presents the different approaches to the principle of distinction in non-international armed conflict: the specific-act approach, the membership approach, the functional non-privileged combatancy approach, and the direct participation in hostilities with extended temporal scope in light of the commitments and undertakings of various armed groups. It concludes with the findings made on the basis of the study of the commitments made by armed groups, underlying in particular the issues that remain problematic regarding the principle of distinction in non-international armed conflict, as well as the issues on which a consensus in conceivable.

Exploring the “continuous combat function” concept in armed conflicts: Time for an extended application?

2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (907-909) ◽  
pp. 267-285
Author(s):  
Sabrina Henry
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Function Concept ◽  
Extended Application

AbstractThis paper focuses on the “continuous combat function” concept and proposes to extend its application. First, the article will demonstrate that the continuous combat function concept should be extended to certain members of organized armed groups in cases where those groups do not belong to any of the parties to an international armed conflict and whose actions do not reach the level of intensity required for a separate non-international armed conflict (NIAC) to exist. Secondly, the paper will look at the extension of this concept in order to determine individual membership in State armed forces in the context of a NIAC, while arguing that the notion of “armed forces” should be interpreted differently depending of the nature of the conflict, be it international or non-international.

scholarly journals Lessons for the law of armed conflict from commitments of armed groups: identification of legitimate targets and prisoners of war

2011 ◽  
Vol 93 (882) ◽  
pp. 463-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandesh Sivakumaran
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law ◽  
Rules Set

AbstractArmed groups frequently issue ad hoc commitments that contain a law of armed conflict component. These commitments detail the obligation of the relevant armed group to abide by international humanitarian law, the Geneva Conventions, or particular rules set out in the commitment. They commit the group to abide by international standards, sometimes exceed international standards, or in certain respects violate international standards. Although these commitments are often overlooked, they offer certain lessons for the law of armed conflict. This article considers the commitments of armed groups with respect to two specific areas of the law that are either of contested interpretation or seemingly inapplicable to non-international armed conflicts, namely the identification of legitimate targets and the prisoners of war regime.

scholarly journals DEBATE: Should the obligations of states and armed groups under international humanitarian law really be equal?

2011 ◽  
Vol 93 (882) ◽  
pp. 425-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Sassòli ◽  
Yuval Shany
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Humanitarian Action ◽  
Third Dimension ◽  
Image Position

By introducing a new ‘debate’ section, the Review hopes to contribute to the reflection on current ethical, legal, or practical controversies around humanitarian issues. This section will expose readers to the key arguments concerning a particular contemporary question of humanitarian law or humanitarian action.For this first debate, the Review asked two members of its Editorial Board, Professor Marco Sassòli and Professor Yuval Shany, to debate on the topic of equality of states and armed groups under international humanitarian law. Professor René Provost comments on this debate, adding a third dimension to the discussion.The crucial question is whether it is realistic to apply the current legal regime to non-state armed groups. How can armed groups, with sometimes very limited means and low levels of organization, meet the same obligations as states? What are the incentives for armed groups to respect rules that their opponents have enacted? Why should they respect any rules when the very fact of taking arms against the state already makes them ‘outlaws’?All participants in this discussion share an aspiration to ensure better legal protection for all those affected by armed conflicts. Professors Sassòli and Shany have agreed to present two ‘radically’ opposed stances, Professor Sassòli maintaining that equality should be reconsidered and replaced by a sliding scale of obligations, and Professor Shany rebutting this assertion. Professor Provost then reflects on the stances put forward by the two debaters and invites us to revisit the very notion of equality of belligerents.The debaters have simplified their complex legal reasoning for the sake of clarity and brevity. Readers of the Review should bear in mind that the debaters actual legal positions are more nuanced than they may appear in this debate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document