scholarly journals Chinese perspectives on the ad bellum/in bello relationship and a cultural critique of the ad bellum/in bello separation in international humanitarian law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Zhuo Liang
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
World Order ◽  
Moral Principle ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Cultural Critique ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Holistic Understanding ◽  
The World

Abstract The intriguing relationship between jus ad bellum and jus in bello has provoked perennial academic debates. This article examines this issue from Chinese perspectives and offers a cultural critique of the well-entrenched norm of the ad bellum/in bello separation in international humanitarian law. Based on its distinctive traditional perception of the world order and the meaning of war, China embraces a holistic understanding of the ad bellum/in bello relationship. This relationship is construed as essentially harmonized. The cardinal moral principle underpinning it is that a just war should be conducted in a just way. The ad bellum/in bello separation in international humanitarian law has a Western origin, and the rationale behind it intimates Western sensitivity to the European just war tradition in which jus in bello was parasitic on jus ad bellum. It is assumed that jus ad bellum and jus in bello are irreconcilably in conflict once they come into contact with one another. This assumption is followed by a widely-held belief that any attempt to reconnect the two concepts would bring nothing but the subordination of jus in bello to jus ad bellum as experienced in European just war and, consequently, the collapse of the former. Chinese perspectives nevertheless evidence that this conventional line of thinking, hampering scholars from thinking beyond the sealed ad bellum/in bello separation, is not sound. A proposal for a more constructive solution should be taken into consideration.

Aggression and the symmetrical application of International Humanitarian Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Kalmanovitz
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Hard Choice ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Causes Of War ◽  
Widespread View

Recent scholarship in just war theory has challenged the principle of symmetrical application of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This revisionist work, which is increasingly dominating the field of contemporary war ethics, rejects the idea that the rules of conduct of war (jus in bello) should be agnostic about the justice of the decision to go to war (jus ad bellum). Just wars are perceived to be inherently at odds with the principle of symmetrical application of IHL, which appears to create a hard choice between justice and legality. I show that this challenge to IHL is misplaced. It derives from a widespread view among just war theorists according to which only one side in a just war can be justified in using force. By looking closely at the nature of adjudication of just causes of war, I show that there can be cases of war in which both sides are justified in using force, and cases in which, though not objectively justified, both sides may be excused for fighting. On the basis of this understanding of jus ad bellum, I argue that the principle of symmetrical application of IHL in fact best reflects the uncertainty and complexity that should characterize the practical doctrine of jus ad bellum.

scholarly journals Fiqh al-Jihād in Modern Warfare: Analyzing Prospects and Challenges with Reference to International Humanitarian Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 241
Author(s):  
Fajri Matahati Muhammadin ◽  
Thara Kunarti Wahab
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Literature Research ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Modern Warfare ◽  
The Way

In discussing the compatibility of the Islamic concept of jihād and international law, most researches focus on the jus ad bellum (justifications of war) of fiqh al jihād and less on the jus in bello (lawful conducts of war). This article observes the relation between fiqh al-jihād and modern international humanitarian law, and sets out both the prospects and challenges of such a concept in modern times. It is argued that some challenges are due to the lack of emphasis on the principles of fiqh al-jihād that are shared with modern International Humanitarian Law, or the existence of differing opinions between Islamic scholars. Using a literature research, this article finds that the way to address this is to make a unified code of fiqh al-jihād, involving scholars from all schools of thoughts, to agree on a common set of rules.

The Relationship between Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Okimoto Keichiro
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter discusses the relationship between jus ad bellum (international law regulating the resort to force) and jus in bello (law of armed conflict). It examines state practice, international decisions, and expert opinions to determine how the relationship has been addressed in practice. The chapter considers the question of whether jus in bello applies equally to the unlawful and lawful parties to an armed conflict before turning to the legal implications of the cumulative requirements of the law of self-defence and international humanitarian law (IHL) imposed on a use of force in self-defence. Finally, it considers the legal implications of the concurrent application of Chapter VII of the UN Charter and IHL with respect to use authorized under Chapter VII.

Justified: Just War and the Ethics of Violence and World Order

2021 ◽  
pp. 435-448
Author(s):  
Chris Brown
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
World Order ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Just War Tradition ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Impact

This volume’s final Part VII on the impact of legal claims in war discourses is introduced by Chris Brown. In this chapter, he fundamentally questions the relevance of international law as a frame of reference for the justification and limitation of war. Brown turns our attention back to just war which we have discussed earlier in this volume (ch. 2 by Anthony Lang, Jr): Brown argues that, properly understood, the just war tradition can be defended against most of its critics, the exceptions being those Clausewitzian realists and Gandhian pacifists who refuse to make the kind of discriminations upon which the tradition is based. More problematic are some of the newer friends of the tradition, analytical political theorists who reject its praxis-oriented dimension, and focus on the rights and responsibilities of individuals, discounting the importance of collectivities. These writers are, in some respects, closer to the medieval tradition than are defenders of contemporary international humanitarian law, but their reliance on the ability of philosophers to decide matters of justice leads to a dogmatism uncharacteristic of the just war tradition, and their emphasis on the individual undermines the link between theory and practice. This chapter defends a traditional, albeit post-Christian, reading of the notion of justified war against both its overt opponents and its supposed friends.

Automatic Cyber Defence and the Laws of War

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-237
Author(s):  
Nicholas Tsagourias ◽  
Russell Buchan
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Computer Hardware ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Cyber Attack ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum

Automatic cyber defence describes computer operations to neutralise a cyber attack. Once a system detects that it is under cyber attack, it automatically launches offensive cyber operations that pursue the attacker back to its own network with the objective of rescuing stolen data or disabling or destroying the computer hardware and software that is responsible for hosting and distributing the attacking code. The aim of this article is to examine the legality of automatic cyber defence under the law regulating the use of force in international law (jus ad bellum) and under international humanitarian law (jus in bello). Thus, the first part of this article examines automatic cyber defence in the context of the jus ad bellum by considering the legal requirements of an armed attack, necessity, and proportionality. In the second part, it examines the jus in bello aspects of automatic cyber defence and, in particular, whether it triggers an international or a non-international armed conflict and, if so, whether it can comply with the principles of distinction and proportionality.

Not yet havoc: geopolitical change and the international rules on military force

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 (S1) ◽  
pp. 51-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL BYERS
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Jus In Bello ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

This article considers the relationship between geopolitical change and the evolving international rules on military force. Its focus is the impact of the United States’ rise to hegemonic status on the rules governing recourse to force (the jus ad bellum) and the conduct of hostilities (the jus in bello, otherwise known as ‘international humanitarian law’). For reasons of space and clarity of analysis, the article does not focus on the different, more traditional IR questions of whether and why the behaviour of the United States might be constrained by these rules.

Conceptions And Interpretations of Human Rights in Europe and Asia: Normative Aspects

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-135
Author(s):  
Bożena Drzewicka
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The West ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The World ◽  
International Human

Conceptions And Interpretations of Human Rights in Europe and Asia: Normative AspectsThe issue of confronting values between civilizations has become very important. It influences not only the level of international politics but also the international normative activity. It is very interesting for the modern international law and its doctrine. The most important factor of causing huge changes in the system of international law is still the international human rights protection and the international humanitarian law which is related to it. It is very difficult to create one catalogue of executive instruments and procedures but it is possible to influence the attitude toward the basic paradigms. The frictions appear from time to time and move to other planes. The West and Asia are still antagonists in the dialogue on the future of the world. The article is a contribution to the intercivilizational dialogue.

Targeting Worship Places: “A Comparative Study on International Humanitarian Law and Islamic Law”.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (- 2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Syed Raza Shah Gilani ◽  
Muhammad Haroon Khan ◽  
Muhammad Haseeb
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The World ◽  
Religious Site

War and atrocities are not new to this world, Islamic law and IHL both have addressed this subject and have described the principle of warfare such as that the belligerents must minimize incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects including religious site, and that this limits the means and methods that they can use. Islamic law which comprises of sharia and fiqh discusses this subject but it is not codified. Islamic law has not yet been acknowledged when it comes to IHL -even article 38 recognizes general principles of nation as a source. Islam is the second largest religion in the world which mirrors the modern framework of IHL and is complementary to that regime.

scholarly journals EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT OF «ARMED CONFLICT»: HISTORICAL, LEGAL AND THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-26
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Severinova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Modern World ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
Methodological Aspects

The article analyzes the theoretical and methodological aspects of the formation and development of doctrinal ideas about the meaning of the concept of «armed conflict» in the history of world political and legal thought. The question of the name of the branch of law that regulates armed conflict, by analyzing its historical names such as «law of war», «laws and customs of war», «law of armed conflict», «international humanitarian law» and «international humanitarian law, used in armed conflicts». As a result of this analysis, it can be concluded that it would be most appropriate to use the terms «international humanitarian law» only in a narrow sense or «international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts», which is more cumbersome but most accurately describes the field. It is emphasized that due to the availability of new powerful weapons (economic, political, informational, cultural and weapons of mass destruction), which are dangerous both for the aggressor and for the whole world; the aggressor's desire to downplay its role in resolving conflicts in order to avoid sanctions from other countries and international organizations, as well as to prevent the loss of its authority and position on the world stage; the attempts of the aggressor countries to establish their control over the objects of aggression (including integrating them into their political, economic and security systems) without excessive damage to them is the transformation of methods and means of warfare. It is determined that the long history of the formation of the law of armed conflict has led to the adoption at the level of international law of the provision prohibiting any armed aggression in the world, which is reflected in such a principle as non-use of force or threat of force. At the same time, the UN Charter became the first international act in the history of mankind, which completely prohibited armed aggression and enshrined this principle at the international level, which is binding on all states of the modern world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document