Law Commons^™

Naval War College Situation: Conflict In Gregoria And Tanaka: The Law Of Targeting, Project Director: Michael N. Schmitt

International Law Studies

This article addresses complex law of armed conflict (LOAC) issues posed by a scenario with eight “situations” examined during a tabletop workshop conducted by the U.S. Naval War College’s Stockton Center for International Law. Participants included judge advocates from the United States and uniformed legal advisors from Israel, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, all of whom had extensive experience providing legal advice on targeting. Also included were academics with particular expertise in the law of armed conflict. The situations were drafted to reflect situations some of the participants had faced in international or non-international armed conflict.

The scenario involves …

Does International Humanitarian Law Confer Undue Legitimacy On Violence In War?, Kieran R.J. Tinkler

International Law Studies

International humanitarian law is lauded as a civilizing force that seeks to limit the effects of war for humanitarian reasons. There is, however, an increasing sense that IHL has facilitated rather than restrained military operations by conferring undue legitimacy on violence in war. This article focuses on the nature of the relationship between legitimacy and IHL to ascertain whether this is indeed the case. It concludes that, while IHL alone cannot confer "normative legitimacy" on battlefield conduct, it does frame "empirical legitimacy." Whether such legitimacy is unwarranted is, ultimately, best judged by reference to morality. Yet insistence on the pre-eminence …

Cyber Peacekeeping Operations And The Regulation Of The Use Of Lethal Force, Nicholas Tsagourias, Giacomo Biggio

International Law Studies

Peacekeeping is an essential tool at the disposal of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security. The growing relevance of cyber technologies presents itself as an opportunity to adapt peacekeeping to the challenges of a rapidly evolving security landscape. This article introduces the notion of "cyber-peacekeeping," defined as the incorporation and use of cyber capabilities by peacekeepers. It discusses the legal basis for cyber-peacekeeping and the foundational principles of consent, impartiality, and use of defensive force. The article examines the use of lethal force by cyber-peacekeepers under the law of armed conflict paradigm. It considers the …

Revisiting Ad Bellum Proportionality: Challenging The Factors Used To Assess It, Yishai Beer

International Law Studies

Traditionally, international law has established a binary distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello. The former relates to the right to exercise military force. The latter regulates the conduct of adversaries engaged in an armed conflict. However, the prevailing legal approach doesn't accept this dichotomy. It wants to reduce war's hazards by applying the ad bellum rules, including the proportionality requirement, continuously throughout the conduct of armed conflict. To that end, it has established factors that define the essence of the continuing ad bellum proportionality requirement. This article challenges the near-unanimous consensus regarding these factors. It argues that …

Autonomous Cyber Capabilities Below And Above The Use Of Force Threshold: Balancing Proportionality And The Need For Speed, Peter Margulies

International Law Studies

Protecting the cyber domain requires speedy responses. Mustering that speed will be a task reserved for autonomous cyber agents—software that chooses particular actions without prior human approval. Unfortunately, autonomous agents also suffer from marked deficits, including bias, unintelligibility, and a lack of contextual judgment. Those deficits pose serious challenges for compliance with international law principles such as proportionality.

In the jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and the law of countermeasures, compliance with proportionality reduces harm and the risk of escalation. Autonomous agent flaws will impair their ability to make the fine-grained decisions that proportionality entails. However, a …

Strategic Proportionality: Limitations On The Use Of Force In Modern Armed Conflicts, Noam Lubell, Amichai Cohen

International Law Studies

The nature of modern armed conflicts, combined with traditional interpretations of proportionality, poses serious challenges to the jus ad bellum goal of limiting and controlling wars. In between the jus ad bellum focus on decisions to use force, and the international humanitarian law (IHL) regulation of specific attacks, there is a far-reaching space in which the regulatory role of international law is bereft of much needed clarity. Perhaps the most striking example is in relation to overall casualties of war. If the jus ad bellum is understood as applying to the opening moments of the conflict, then it cannot provide …

The Unlawfulness Of A “Bloody Nose Strike” On North Korea, Kevin Jon Heller

International Law Studies

The United States has reportedly been debating whether to "react to some nuclear or missile test with a targeted strike against a North Korean facility to bloody Pyongyang’s nose and illustrate the high price the regime could pay for its behavior." This article asks a simple question: would such a “bloody nose strike” (BNS) violate the jus ad bellum?

Providing a coherent answer is complicated by the lack of clarity surrounding the United States’ planning. In particular, the U.S. government has not specified what kind of provocation it believes would justify launching a BNS, has not identified precisely what …

Twelve Key Questions On Self-Defense Against Non-State Actors, Terry D. Gill, Kinga Tibori-Szabó

International Law Studies

This article examines the most pertinent questions relating to the applicability of the right of self-defense to attacks conducted by non-State armed groups (NSAGs) acting independently of State control from the territory of one or more States against the territory of another State. These questions are approached from the perspective of legality (does the right of self-defense apply to attacks not mounted by or under the control of a State) and modality (assuming the applicability of self-defense to such attacks; how do the principles of necessity, proportionality and immediacy affect its application)? Starting with an assessment of the place of …

The Proportionality Rule And Mental Health Harm In War, Sarah Knuckey, Alex Moorehead, Audrey Mccalley, Adam Brown

Faculty Scholarship

The foundational international humanitarian law rule of proportionality — that parties to an armed conflict may not attack where civilian harm would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage — is normally interpreted to encompass civilian physical injuries only. Attacks may cause significant mental harms also, yet current interpretations of the law lag behind science in understanding and recognizing these kinds of harms. This article analyzes legal, public health, psychology, and neuroscience research to assess the extent to which mental health harms should and could be taken into account in proportionality assessments.

Can We Starve The Civilians? Exploring The Dichotomy Between The Traditional Law Of Maritime Blockade And Humanitarian Initiatives, Phillip J. Drew

International Law Studies

The contemporary practice of maritime blockade can trace its origins to the Dutch Placaat of 1564, under which the Dutch Navy enforced the closure of Spanish ports to maritime traffic, both inbound and outbound. Although originally designed to stop all military reinforcements from reaching an area, in the ensuing 450 years, blockade has developed into a method of warfare whose effects are primarily economic. As a result of the urbanization of much of the world’s population over the past 200 years, many States have become heavily reliant on imported foodstuffs and commodities, most of which moves by sea. When those …

Indeterminacy In The Law Of Armed Conflict, Adil Ahmad Haque

International Law Studies

Controversy and confusion pervade the law of armed conflict. Its most basic rules may seem ambiguous, vague, incomplete, or inconsistent. The prevailing view of customary international law confronts serious problems, in principle and in practice, when applied to the customary law of armed conflict. Legal indeterminacy, in its different forms, might be reduced or resolved in light of the object and purpose of the law of armed conflict, or by taking into account other relevant rules of international law. Unfortunately, the purpose of the law of armed conflict is itself the subject of deep disagreement. So is the relationship between …

Proportionality Under International Humanitarian Law: The "Reasonable Military Commander" Standard And Reverberating Effects, Ian Henderson, Kate Reece

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The principle of proportionality protects civilians and civilian objects against expected incidental harm from an attack that is excessive to the military advantage anticipated from the attack. However, despite its status as a fundamental norm of international humanitarian law (IHL), key terms are not defined in relevant treaties nor do they benefit from critical judicial explanation. This has caused challenges for both academics and military commanders alike in explaining and applying the test for proportionality.

The Article expands upon two points that were raised and generated interesting discussion at The Second Israel Defense Forces International Conference on the Law of …

Four Comments On The Application Of Proportionality Under The Law Of Armed Conflict, Lieutenant Colonel Roni Katzir

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The existence of the principle of proportionality as a norm is undisputed, and military commanders in armed conflicts around the world apply it continuously. As the principle is formulated in general terms--prohibiting attacks that may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, or damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, that would be excessive in relation to the military advantage anticipated--it is also clear that interpreting and applying the different elements of the principle is no simple task.

This Article shall consider four select issues regarding different elements of the principle of proportionality.

First …

Reframing The Proportionality Principle, Michael A. Newton

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Proportionality functions as one of the most important legal constraints applicable to the conduct of hostilities. In that context, this short essay discusses the commonly encountered misapplications of Cicero's classic sentiment that "salus populwe supremus est lex...silent enim leges inter armes." Rather than serving as a necessary basis for a positive articulation of lawful force as an exception to the norm, jus in bello proportionality delineates the outer boundaries of the commander's appropriate discretion. The mere invocation of jus in bello proportionality cannot become an effective extension of asymmetric combat power by artificially crippling combatant capabilities. This essay ends by …

The Conduct Of Hostilities And International Humanitarian Law: Challenges Of 21st Century Warfare, International Law Association Study Group On The Conduct Of Hostilities In The 21st Century

International Law Studies

The International Law Association Study Group on the Conduct of Hostilities in the 21st Century was established in 2011 and held its first meeting in 2012. The Study Group has explored numerous issues arising from the relationship between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law in the conduct of military operations, technological challenges posed by new weapons systems, and the basic principles of IHL in the conduct of hostilities. In 2015, the Study Group established three working groups focusing on core issues within IHL in relation to the conduct of hostilities in modern warfare. These working group topics …

The Limits Of Inviolability: The Parameters For Protection Of United Nations Facilities During Armed Conflict, Laurie R. Blank

International Law Studies

This article examines the international legal protections for United Nations humanitarian assistance and other civilian facilities during armed conflict, including under general international law, setting forth the immunities of the United Nations, and the law of armed conflict (LOAC), the relevant legal framework during wartime. Recent conflicts highlight three primary issues: (1) collateral damage to UN facilities as a consequence of strikes on military objectives nearby and military operations in the immediate vicinity; (2) the misuse of UN facilities for military purposes; and (3) direct attacks on fighters, weapons or other equipment that cause damage to such facilities. To identify …

Mapping War Crimes In Syria, Beth Van Schaak

International Law Studies

This article maps the range of war crimes being committed in Syria with reference to the applicable treaty and customary international law and prospects for prosecution. It begins by presenting the international legal framework employed to determine when an armed conflict began in Syria, how this conflict is classified under international law and which multilateral treaties and customary rules are operative. This framework underlies the determination of which war crimes can be prosecuted, which tribunals might have jurisdiction and which perpetrators may be made subject to indictment. The article next focuses on some open legal and factual issues around certain …

Off Target: Selection, Precaution, And Proportionality In The Dod Manual, Adil Ahmad Haque

International Law Studies

The United States Department of Defense Law of War Manual misrepresents customary international law governing target selection, precautions in attack and proportionality. Contrary to the Manual’s assertions, attackers with a choice of targets for obtaining a similar military advantage must select the target that endangers the fewest civilians; often must avoid harming civilians even at some additional risk to themselves or to their mission; and must refrain from attack if the expected harm to civilians—including to civilians forced to serve as human shields—would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.

Virtual Violence - Disruptive Cyberspace Operations As "Attacks" Under International Humanitarian Law, Ido Kilovaty

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Power outages, manipulations of data, and interruptions of Internet access are all possible effects of cyber operations. Unfortunately, recent efforts to address and regulate cyberspace operations under international law often emphasize the uncommon, though severe, cyber-attacks that cause deaths, injuries, or physical destruction. This paper deals with cyber operations during armed conflicts that cause major disruption or interruption effects – as opposed to deaths, injuries, or physical destruction. The purpose of this paper is to explore the consequences of these cyber operations that cause major disruption or interruption effects, and to argue that they might still constitute “acts of violence,” …

Puzzles Of Proportion And The Reasonable Military Commander: Reflections On The Law, Ethics, And Geopolitics Of Proportionality, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

This article offers modest reflections on jus in bello proportionality. It suggests that the law of armed conflict (LOAC) build on the only consensus legal standard that exists: that of the good-faith reasonable military commander. The difficulty — here, as with any reasonableness standard — is to identify factors that realistically can, and legally should, guide adherence to it and to consider the objective and subjective dimensions of judgments under the standard. Part II scrutinizes the content and status of Additional Protocol I’s (API) canonical definition of proportionality. It analyzes its text and context to bring out the extent to …

Autonomous Weapons And International Humanitarian Law: Advantages, Open Technical Questions And Legal Issues To Be Clarified, Marco Sassoli

International Law Studies

This contribution argues that autonomous weapons systems may have advantages from the perspective of ensuring better respect for international humanitarian law (IHL). This may be the case if they are one day capable of perceiving the information necessary to comply with IHL, can apply IHL to that information, and if it can be ensured that they will not deviate from the ways in which humans have programmed them. In the view of the author, targeting decisions do not require subjective value judgments a machine would be unable to make. In order to ensure IHL is respected with regard to use …

Adapting The Law Of Armed Conflict To Autonomous Weapon Systems, Kenneth Anderson, Daniel Reisner, Matthew Waxman

International Law Studies

As increasingly automated—and in some cases fully autonomous—weapon systems enter the battlefield or become possible, it is important that international norms to regulate them head down a path that is coherent and practical. Contrary to the claims of some advocates, autonomous weapon systems are not inherently illegal or unethical. The technologies involved potentially hold promise for making armed conflict more discriminating and causing less harm on the battlefield. They do pose great challenges, however, with regard to law of armed conflict rules regulating the use of weapons. To adapt existing law to meet those challenges, we propose a three-tiered approach …

Proportionality 2.0: Evaluating Military Force In A Modern International Humanitarian Legal Framework, Deborah Beth Medows

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Anticipatory Self-Defense In The Cyber Context, Terry D. Gill, Paul A.L. Ducheine

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Cyber Attacks: Proportionality And Precautions In Attack, Eric Talbot Jensen

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Precision Air Warfare And The Law Of Armed Conflict, Christopher J. Markham, Michael N. Schmitt

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Belligerent Targeting And The Invalidity Of A Least Harmful Means Rule, Geoffrey S. Corn, Laurie R. Blank, Chris Jenks, Eric Talbot Jensen

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Targeting And The Concept Of Intent, Jens David Ohlin

Michigan Journal of International Law

International law generally prohibits military forces from intentionally targeting civilians; this is the principle of distinction. In contrast, unintended collateral damage is permissible unless the anticipated civilian deaths outweigh the expected military advantage of the strike; this is the principle of proportionality. These cardinal targeting rules of international humanitarian law are generally assumed by military lawyers to be relatively well-settled. However, recent international tribunals applying this law in a string of little-noticed decisions have completely upended this understanding. Armed with criminal law principles from their own domestic systems — often civil law jurisdictions — prosecutors, judges and even scholars have …

Belligerent Targeting And The Invalidity Of A Least Harmful Means Rule, Geoffrey S. Corn, Laurie R. Blank, Chris Jenks, Eric Talbot Jensen

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The law of armed conflict provides the authority to use lethal force as a first resort against identified enemy belligerent operatives. There is virtually no disagreement with the rule that once an enemy belligerent becomes hors de combat — what a soldier would recognizes as “combat ineffective” — this authority to employ deadly force terminates. Recently, however, some have forcefully asserted that the LOAC includes an obligation to capture in lieu of employing deadly force whenever doing so presents no meaningful risk to attacking forces, even when the enemy belligerent is neither physically disabled or manifesting surrender. Proponents of this …

Law And Ethics For Autonomous Weapon Systems: Why A Ban Won't Work And How The Laws Of War Can, Kenneth Anderson, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

Public debate is heating up over the future development of autonomous weapon systems. Some concerned critics portray that future, often invoking science-fiction imagery, as a plain choice between a world in which those systems are banned outright and a world of legal void and ethical collapse on the battlefield. Yet an outright ban on autonomous weapon systems, even if it could be made effective, trades whatever risks autonomous weapon systems might pose in war for the real, if less visible, risk of failing to develop forms of automation that might make the use of force more precise and less harmful …