Double standards in US warfare: exploring the historical legacy of civilian protection and the complex nature of the moral-legal nexus

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 651-674 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEBASTIAN KAEMPF
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Historical Legacy ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Civilian Protection

AbstractThis article investigates how – by breaking with the historical double standards regarding civilian protection in conflicts – by the end of the twentieth century, US warfare has come to comply with International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Yet, civilians are still being killed. This has sparked controversies over what constitutes legitimate targeting practices and as to whether higher levels of civilian protection could be achieved. Through an engagement with these debates, including an exploration of the evolution of the norm of non-combatant immunity with specific reference to US warfare, the article argues that IHL does not provide fully satisfactory answers to these issues as it is too permissive in relation to the killing of civilians. The article proposes that more stringent moral guidelines, such as those underpinning the idea of ‘due care’, have the potential to go much further in providing protection for the innocent in war.

The Humanitarian Civilian

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Sutton
Keyword(s):  
Military Training ◽  
South Sudan ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Everyday Practice ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Civilian Protection ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Directing Attention

In international humanitarian law (IHL), the principle of distinction delineates the difference between the civilian and the combatant, and it safeguards the former from being intentionally targeted in armed conflicts. This monograph explores the way in which the idea of distinction circulates within, and beyond, IHL. Taking a bottom-up approach, the multi-sited study follows distinction across three realms: the Kinetic realm, where distinction is in motion in South Sudan; the Pedagogical realm, where distinction is taught in civil–military training spaces in Europe; and the Intellectual realm, where distinction is formulated and adjudicated in Geneva and the Hague. Directing attention to international humanitarian actors, the book shows that these actors seize upon signifiers of ‘civilianness’ in everyday practice. To safeguard their civilian status, and to deflect any qualities of ‘combatantness’ that might affix to them, humanitarian actors strive to distinguish themselves from other international actors in their midst. The latter include peacekeepers working for the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), and soldiers who deploy with NATO missions. Crucially, some of the distinctions enacted cut along civilian–civilian lines, suggesting that humanitarian actors are longing for something more than civilian status–the ‘civilian plus’. This special status presents a paradox: the appeal to the ‘civilian plus’ undermines general civilian protection, yet as the civilian ideal becomes increasingly beleaguered, a special civilian status appears ever more desirable. However disruptive these practices may be to the principle of distinction in IHL, it is emphasized that even at the most normative level there is no bright-line distinction to be found.

19 The Law of Non-International Armed Conflict

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fleck Dieter
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law

This chapter provides an overview of the law of non-international armed conflicts and its progressive development. The law of armed conflict, as it has developed in the last part of the nineteenth and the first part of the twentieth century, deals predominantly with wars between states. Its basic principles and rules are, however, likewise relevant for non-international armed conflicts: in all armed conflicts, elementary considerations of humanity must be respected under all circumstances, in order to protect victims, to reduce human sufferings, and to minimize damages to objects vital for survival. Therefore, the parties to the conflict do not have an unlimited choice of the means and methods of conducting hostilities, nor of selecting the targets to be attacked, and they must protect the victims from the effects and consequences of war. This concept is reflected in the principles and rules of international humanitarian law, to be respected by all and, while taking military necessity into account, limiting the use of force for humanitarian reasons. Parties to the conflict respecting these principles and rules are considered as respecting the international order, while those seriously violating them will commit internationally wrongful acts and perpetrators are liable to punishment.

International treaties against terrorism and the use of terrorism during armed conflict and by armed forces

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (864) ◽  
pp. 853-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel O'Donnell
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
War On Terrorism ◽  
The Status ◽  
Terrorist Acts

AbstractDuring the second half of the twentieth century the international community, facing the terrorist phenomenon, reacted with the adoption of a series of treaties concerning specific types of terrorist acts, and the obligations of states with regard to them. Alternatively terrorism-oriented legislation, which initially covered only acts affecting civilians, has gradually expanded to cover some acts of terrorism against military personnel and installations. This contribution attempts to assess the repercussions of this evolution on the status and the protection of armed forces engaged in the so-called “war on terrorism” by examining the existing dynamic between these regulations and international humanitarian law.

Jewish-European Émigré Lawyers

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Academic Socialization ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Subjective Experiences ◽  
Politics And Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Individual Human

Jewish émigré lawyers, historians, archivists and activists and their individual approaches to International Humanitarian Law. Jewish-European émigré lawyers in the twentieth century were important agents of legal internationalism and served as carriers of intercultural concepts of international legal thought; concepts, which fed into postwar discourses, but were also often forgotten or marginalized. This interdisciplinary volume focusses on a range of international lawyers, historians, archivists and activists and their individual approaches towards International Humanitarian Law. It uses a biographical lens to analyze the impact of subjective experiences like academic socialization, ideological and religious viewpoints (Weltanschauung), social marginalization, political and racial persecution, and forced emigration. Moreover, it investigates the extent to which the emigrants’ experiences shaped typical notions of twentieth century politics and law, such as universalism and particularism, cosmopolitanism and sovereignty, national self-determination, citizenship and statelessness, collective minority rights, and individual human rights.

scholarly journals Double Standards in Peacekeeping? Subcontracting Peacekeeping and International Humanitarian Law

1999 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marten Zwanenburg
Keyword(s):  
Sierra Leone ◽  
Command And Control ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Peace Enforcement ◽  
And Control

Increasingly the UN is ‘subcontracting’ peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations. The ECOMOG intervention in Sierra Leone is an example. Some members of ECOMOG have been accused of violating international humanitarian law. These accusations have not been adequately addressed by ECOMOG nor by the UN. The limited attention paid to this problem by the UN in ‘subcontracted’ operations contrasts with increased concern with respect for international humanitarian law by forces under UN command and control. It is argued that the UN should ensure that ‘subcontracting’ does not lead to lowering standards of international humanitarian law.

What future for the doctrine of belligerent reprisals?

2002 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 107-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Unlawful Conduct

Throughout its extensive history, the doctrine of belligerent reprisals has caused controversy and provoked debate, none more so than in the Twentieth Century, with its unprecedented developments in the codification of the laws of armed conflict. Belligerent reprisals areprima facieunlawful acts taken against a party to an armed conflict that is violating the law for the purpose of coercing that party to cease its unlawful conduct. Owing to this law enforcement function, belligerent reprisals have historically been treated as lawful acts, provided that they have been carried out in observance of a number of established principles. The rules laid down in international humanitarian law have increasingly limited the scope for taking reprisals by excluding certain categories of persons and objects from being the lawful targets of reprisal actions. While palpable disagreement exists regarding the customary status of the law pertaining to belligerent reprisals, more fundamental dispute arises in relation to the desirability of the actual institution of belligerent reprisals itself.

Minimizing civilian harm in populated areas: Lessons from examining ISAF and AMISOM policies

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (901) ◽  
pp. 225-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sahr Muhammedally
Keyword(s):  
North Atlantic ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
African Union ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Fire Policy ◽  
Civilian Protection ◽  
The North ◽  
Security Assistance ◽  
International Security Assistance Force ◽  
Policies And Practices

AbstractBoth the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) and the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's security assistance mission to Afghanistan – have recognized the importance of reducing civilian harm, and adopted policies and practices that restrict the use of certain weapons in populated areas. ISAF commanders issued a number of tactical directives that restricted the use of certain air-delivered weapons, and AMISOM developed an indirect fire policy limiting the use of artillery and other indirect fire munitions in populated areas. This article examines both ISAF and AMISOM policies and practices to reduce civilian harm in populated areas and explores how these policies strengthened adherence to international humanitarian law and illustrated new ways in which armed actors can take feasible precautions and prioritize civilian protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document