Legal classification of the armed conflict in Ukraine in light of international humanitarian law

Abstract Disinformation in armed conflict may pose several distinctive forms of harm to civilians: exposure to retaliatory violence, distortion of information vital to securing human needs, and severe mental suffering. The gravity of these harms, along with the modern nature of wartime disinformation, is out of keeping with the traditional classification of disinformation in international humanitarian law (IHL) as a permissible ruse of war. A patchwork set of protections drawn from IHL, international human rights law and international criminal law may be used to limit disinformation operations during armed conflict, but numerous gaps and ambiguities undermine the force of this legal framework, calling for further scholarly attention and clarification.

Download Full-text

The Fight Against the Islamic State andJus in Bello

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156516000339 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 29 (3) ◽

pp. 827-852 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

VAIOS KOUTROULIS

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Islamic State ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Applicable Law ◽

State Actor ◽

Scope Of Application ◽

Geographical Scope

AbstractThis article examines several questions relating to international humanitarian law (jus in bello) with respect to the conflicts against the Islamic State. The first question explored is the classification of conflicts against the Islamic State and the relevant applicable law. The situation in Iraq is a rather classic non-international armed conflict between a state and a non-state actor with third states intervening alongside governmental forces. The situation in Syria is more controversial, especially with respect to the coalition's airstrikes against the Islamic State on Syrian territory. If the Syrian government is considered as not having consented to the coalition's operations, then, according to this author's view, the coalition is involved in two distinct armed conflicts: an international armed conflict with the Syrian government and a non-international armed conflict with the Islamic State. The second question analyzed in the article bears on the geographical scope of application of international humanitarian law. In this context, the article examines whether humanitarian law applies: in the entire territory of the state in whose territory the hostilities take place, in the territories of the intervening states, and in the territory of a third state.

Download Full-text

How does the involvement of a multinational peacekeeping force affect the classification of a situation?

International Review of the Red Cross ◽

10.1017/s1816383114000198 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 95 (891-892) ◽

pp. 659-679 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Eric David ◽

Ola Engdahl

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Peace Operations ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

The Way

The ‘debate’ section of the Review aims at contributing to the reflection on current ethical, legal, or practical controversies around humanitarian issues.In this issue of the Review, we invited two experts in international humanitarian law (IHL) and multinational peace operations – Professor Eric David and Professor Ola Engdahl – to debate on the way in which the involvement of a multinational force may affect the classification of a situation. This question is particularly relevant to establishing whether the situation amounts to an armed conflict or not and, if so, whether the conflict is international or non-international in nature. This in turn will determine the rights and obligations of each party, especially in a context in which multinational forces are increasingly likely to participate in the hostilities.

Download Full-text

18 Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism, and International Humanitarian Law

The Oxford Guide to International Humanitarian Law ◽

10.1093/law/9780198855309.003.0018 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Saul Ben

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Fair Trial ◽

Legal Issues ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Counter Terrorism ◽

Terrorist Groups ◽

Forms Of Violence

This concluding chapter addresses the debate about the coverage, adequacy, and effectiveness of international humanitarian law (IHL) in regulating ‘terrorism’. IHL does not recognize any specific legal categories for, or special regime governing, terrorists and terrorist groups. Rather, the general norms of IHL apply to terrorists according to their conduct. IHL was precisely developed as a kind of exceptional or emergency law comprehensively addressing all forms of violence in armed conflict, including that which is labelled ‘terrorist’ in other areas of law. Particularly relevant to terrorism are the general IHL rules on the classification of violence as armed conflict, the categorization of persons during conflict, targeting, detention, criminal liability, and fair trial. Thus, terrorist and counter-terrorist violence may constitute a non-international armed conflict (NIAC) to which IHL applies if the violence is sufficiently intense and organized. The chapter then considers three key legal issues of particular relevance and specificity to terrorism in armed conflict.

Download Full-text

Part I: Conclusion

10.1093/oso/9780198821946.003.0005 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Tilman Rodenhäuser

Keyword(s):

Eighteenth Century ◽

Civil War ◽

Basic Principle ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Laws Of War ◽

Connected Group ◽

The Individual ◽

Contemporary Practice

Analysing the development of the concept of non-state parties to an armed conflict from the writings of philosophers in the eighteenth century through international humanitarian law (IHL) treaty law to contemporary practice, three threads can be identified. First, as pointed out by Rousseau almost two and a half centuries ago, one basic principle underlying the laws of war is that war is not a relation between men but between entities. Accordingly, the lawful objective of parties cannot be to harm opponents as individuals but only to overcome the entity for which the individual fights. This necessitates that any party to an armed conflict is a collective, organized entity and not a loosely connected group of individuals. Second, de Vattel already stressed that civil war is fought between two parties who ‘acknowledge no common judge’ and have no ‘common superior’ on earth....

Download Full-text

Insufficient Knowledge in Kunduz: The Precautionary Principle and International Humanitarian Law

Journal of Conflict and Security Law ◽

10.1093/jcsl/krz033 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 53-79

Author(s):

Emma J Marchant

Keyword(s):

Precautionary Principle ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Federal Court ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

The Precautionary Principle ◽

Lack Of Information ◽

Operational Application ◽

Federal Court Of Justice ◽

Insufficient Knowledge

Abstract The targeting protocols applied by forces during armed conflict are some of the most secretive documents held by any military. However, their role in applying principles of international humanitarian law (IHL) means that they are key to understanding their development. This piece is primarily concerned with practical and operational application of the precautionary principle under IHL; how much knowledge is sufficient to carry out an attack lawfully during modern armed conflict. In order to establish if a standard has developed with the increase in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance technology, this piece uses the framework of an investigation into an incident in Kunduz, Afghanistan in 2009. I explore the difficulties of obtaining information post-incident, the differential standards expected by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Bundesgerichtshof (German Federal Court of Justice), and the manner in which these can be evaluated through the principles of proportionality, distinction and precautions in attack. The piece looks at the interrelated issues raised by the Rules of Engagement and Tactical Directives, as well as the problems surrounding the clarity of intelligence available. I argue that this case is demonstrative of the failings inherent in the application and practical use of the precautionary principle outlined by IHL. The lack of transparency afforded in, and after, incidents of this nature prevents objective analysis and so the development of IHL can be obfuscated. I conclude that the lack of information following incidents of this kind confuses any intelligence standard that exists under IHL.

Download Full-text

Thresholds in Flux—the Standard for Ascertaining the Requirement of Organization for Armed Groups under International Humanitarian Law

Journal of Conflict and Security Law ◽

10.1093/jcsl/kraa024 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Yutaka Arai-Takahashi

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

Geneva Convention ◽

Prisoners Of War ◽

Organizational Level ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Threshold Condition ◽

Special Importance ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Armed Groups ◽

International Criminal Tribunals

Abstract The requirement of organization is supposed to be of special importance in international humanitarian law (IHL). In the situation of international armed conflict (IAC), this requirement is implicit as part of the collective conditions to be fulfilled by irregular/independent armed groups to enable their members to claim the prisoners of war status under Article 4 A(2) of the Third Geneva Convention. In a non-international armed conflict (NIAC), the eponymous requirement serves, alongside the requirement of intensity of violence, as the threshold condition for ascertaining the onset of a NIAC. While the requirement of organization has not caused much of disputes in IACs, the international criminal tribunals have shown a willingness to examine scrupulously if armed groups in NIACs are sufficiently organized. Still, this article argues that there is need for a nuanced assessment of the organizational level of an armed group in some specific phases of the ongoing armed conflict whose legal character switches (from an NIAC to an IAC, vice-versa, and from a NIAC to a law-enforcement model). It explores what rationales and argumentative model may be adduced to explain such varying standards for organization in different contexts.

Download Full-text

Still a blind spot: The protection of LGBT persons during armed conflict and other situations of violence

International Review of the Red Cross ◽

10.1017/s1816383119000201 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 100 (907-909) ◽

pp. 237-265

Author(s):

Alon Margalit

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Blind Spot ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Important Progress

AbstractThis article draws attention to the situation of LGBT persons during armed conflict. Subjected to violence and discrimination outside the context of armed conflict, the latter aggravates their vulnerability and exposure to various abuses. Despite important progress made with respect to their protection under human rights law, a similar effort is largely absent from the international humanitarian law discourse. This article accordingly highlights some of the norms and challenges pertaining to the protection of LGBT persons in time of war.

Download Full-text

International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities

International Review of the Red Cross ◽

10.1017/s1816383110000597 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 92 (879) ◽

pp. 569-592 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Michael Bothe ◽

Carl Bruch ◽

Jordan Diamond ◽

David Jensen

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Environmental Law ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Environmental Damage ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

Basic Principles ◽

Principle Of Proportionality ◽

Definition Of

AbstractThere are three key deficiencies in the existing body of international humanitarian law (IHL) relating to protection of the environment during armed conflict. First, the definition of impermissible environmental damage is both too restrictive and unclear; second, there are legal uncertainties regarding the protection of elements of the environment as civilian objects; and third, the application of the principle of proportionality where harm to the environment constitutes ‘collateral damage’ is also problematic. These gaps present specific opportunities for clarifying and developing the existing framework. One approach to addressing some of the inadequacies of IHL could be application of international environmental law during armed conflict. The detailed norms, standards, approaches, and mechanisms found in international environmental law might also help to clarify and extend basic principles of IHL to prevent, address, or assess liability for environmental damage incurred during armed conflict.

Download Full-text

Health Care Providers in War and Armed Conflict: Operational and Educational Challenges in International Humanitarian Law and the Geneva Conventions, Part I. Historical Perspective

Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness ◽

10.1017/dmp.2018.41 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 13 (02) ◽

pp. 109-115 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Frederick M. Burkle ◽

Adam L. Kushner ◽

Christos Giannou ◽

Mary A. Paterson ◽

Sherry M. Wren ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Health Care Providers ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Historical Perspective ◽

Geneva Convention ◽

World Health ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Care Providers ◽

The Impact

AbstractSince 1945, the reason for humanitarian crises and the way in which the world responds to them has dramatically changed every 10 to 15 years or less. Planning, response, and recovery for these tragic events have often been ad hoc, inconsistent, and insufficient, largely because of the complexity of global humanitarian demands and their corresponding response system capabilities. This historical perspective chronicles the transformation of war and armed conflicts from the Cold War to today, emphasizing the impact these events have had on humanitarian professionals and their struggle to adapt to increasing humanitarian, operational, and political challenges. An unprecedented independent United Nations–World Health Organization decision in the Battle for Mosul in Iraq to deploy to combat zones emergency medical teams unprepared in the skills of decades-tested war and armed conflict preparation and response afforded to health care providers and dictated by International Humanitarian Law and Geneva Convention protections has abruptly challenged future decision-making and deployments. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:109–115)

Download Full-text