International Humanitarian Law Commons^™

Booty, Bounty, Blockade, And Prize: Time To Reevaluate The Law, Andrew Clapham

International Law Studies

This article considers the so-called belligerent rights of States in times of war. In particular it focuses on booty of war, blockade, and the capture of merchant ships and their cargo. It is suggested that, while the rules may not often be applied today, they nevertheless continue to exert a certain influence, contributing to confusion about the boundaries of the legitimate use of force and a blurring of the distinction between military objectives and civilian objects.

Considering that the UN Charter has outlawed the use of force, the article also questions why such rules concerning capture should continue to have …

Armed Conflicts In Outer Space: Which Law Applies?, Frans G. Von Der Dunk

International Law Studies

So far, outer space has merely become involved in terrestrial armed conflicts as part of the supportive infrastructure for military activities. Unfortunately, the risk that this changes is considerably growing, and it can no longer be excluded that (armed) force will become used in outer space, either directed towards Earth or within outer space itself.

This raises serious issues in the legal context, where space law so far has been premised on the hope that armed conflicts in outer space could be avoided whereas the law of armed conflict was not required so far to deal with the use of …

Responding To Hostile Cyber Operations: The “In-Kind” Option, Michael N. Schmitt, Durward E. Johnson

International Law Studies

Facing hostile cyber operations, States are crafting responsive strategies, tactics and rules of engagement. One of the major challenges in doing so is that key aspects of the international law governing cyber responses are vague, unsettled or complex. Not surprisingly, therefore, international law is markedly absent from strategies and operational concepts. Rather, they tend to take on a practical “tit-for-tat” feel as policymakers logically view “in-kind” responses as “fair play.” For them, responding in-kind surely must be lawful notwithstanding any challenges in discerning the precise legal character of the initial hostile cyber operation.

Testing that sense, this article examines the …

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 Theory And Practice At The Intersection Between Human Rights And Humanitarian Law, Monica Hakimi

Reviews

The United States is more than fifteen years into a fight against terrorism that shows no sign of abating and, with the change in administration, appears to be intensifying. Other Western democracies that have historically been uneasy about U.S. counterterrorism policies have, in recent years, shifted toward those policies. And armed nonstate groups continue to commit large-scale acts of violence in multiple distinct theaters. The legal issues that these situations present are not entirely new, but neither are they going away. Recent publications, like the three works under review, thus provide useful opportunities to reflect on and refine our thinking …

The Popular But Unlawful Armed Reprisal, Mary Ellen O'Connell

Journal Articles

The United States and Iran carried out armed reprisals in Syria during 2017 in the wake of chemical and terror attacks. Despite support for their actions even by countries such as Germany and France, retaliatory uses of force are clearly prohibited under international law. International law generally prohibits all use of armed force with narrow exceptions for self-defense, United Nations Security Council authorization, and consent of a government to participate in a civil war. Military force after an incident are reprisals, which have been expressly forbidden by the UN. Prior to the Trump administration, the U.S. consistently attempted to justify …

How The War Against Isis Changed International Law, Michael P. Scharf

Faculty Publications

In an effort to destroy ISIS, beginning in August 2014, the United States, assisted by a handful of other Western and Arab countries, carried out thousands of bombing sorties and cruise missile attacks against ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria. Iraq had consented to the airstrikes in its territory, but Syria had not, and Russia blocked the UN Security Council from authorizing force against ISIS in Syria. The United States invoked several different legal arguments to justify its airstrikes, including the right of humanitarian intervention, the right to use force in a failed state, and the right of hot pursuit, …

The Applicability Of The Humanitarian Intervention 'Exception' To The Middle Eastern Refugee Crisis: Why The International Community Should Intervene Against Isis, Milena Sterio

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

The refugee crises in Iraq and Syria, which has been evolving over the past decade as a result of both ongoing conflict in these countries and the recent surge of Islamic State-led violence, has morphed into a true humanitarian catastrophe. Tens of thousands of refugees have been subjected to violence and have been dispersed and forced to live under dire conditions; such massive population flows have destabilized the entire region and have threatened the stability of neighboring countries. The United States and several other countries have been engaged in a military air strike campaign against the Islamic State, but the …

Applying The European Convention On Human Rights To The Use Of Physical Force: Al-Saadoon, David S. Goddard

International Law Studies

In Al-Saadoon and Others v. Secretary of State for Defence, the High Court of Justice of England and Wales has found that the United Kingdom’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) can be activated extraterritorially simply through the use by State agents of physical force against an individual. This article explains the judgment and places it in the context of the development of the law both in the United Kingdom and at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). While it remains subject to appeal domestically and its approach may not be followed by the ECtHR, …

State Actors, Humanitarian Intervention And International Law: Reopening Pandora's Box, H. Scott Fairley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Defensive Force Against Non-State Actors: The State Of Play, Monica Hakimi

International Law Studies

This article assesses the implications of the current Syria situation for the international law on the use of defensive force against non-State actors. The law in this area is highly unsettled, with multiple legal positions in play. After mapping the legal terrain, the article shows that the Syria situation accentuates three preexisting trends. First, the claim that international law absolutely prohibits the use of defensive force against non-State actors is increasingly difficult to sustain. States, on the whole, have supported the operation against the so-called Islamic State in Syria. Second, States still have not coalesced around a legal standard on …

The Legality And Implications Of Intentional Interference With Commercial Communication Satellite Signals, Sarah M. Mountin

International Law Studies

Commercial communication satellite signals have become increasingly attractive targets for intentional interference by State and non-State actors. This article discusses the law applicable to satellite signal interference in peacetime, as well as during armed conflict. Specifically, the piece discusses the threshold at which intentional interference may constitute a use of force.

Humanitarian Intervention Post-Syria: Legitimate And Legal?, Milena Sterio

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article looks at the state of affairs under international law by focusing on the existing ban on the use of force and the established exceptions thereto as of December 2014. Topics discussed include the concept of humanitarian intervention, the civil crises in Syria, and international law for the legality of military intervention in Syria. It also examines Harold Koh's proposed normative framework for humanitarian intervention.

Deciding To Intervene, Anna Spain

Publications

Decisions about intervention into today's armed conflicts are difficult, dangerous, and politically complicated. There are no safe choices. Amid the climate of urgency and uncertainty in which intervention decision-making occurs, international law serves as a guide by providing rules about the legality of intervention. These rules assert that, except for in cases of self-defense, choices about when and how to intervene are to be made by the United Nations Security Council. What the rules do not provide, however, is effective guidance for the political choices the Council makes, such as how to prioritize among competing norms. When, for example, should …

Obama's Africa Policy On Human Rights, Use Of Force And Humanitarian Intervention: In Whose Interest, Vincent O. Nmehielle, John-Mark Iyi

Florida A & M University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Iraq And The "Fog Of Law", John F. Murphy

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

The Cost Of Conflation: Preserving The Dualism Of Jus Ad Bellum And Jus In Bello In The Contemporary Law Of War, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

Much post-9/11 scholarship asks whether modern transnational terrorist networks, the increasing availability of catastrophic weapons to nonstate actors, and other novel threats require changes to either or both of the two traditional branches of the law of war: (i) the jus ad bellum, which governs resort to war, and (ii) the jus in bello, which governs the conduct of hostilities. Scant recent work focuses on the equally vital question whether the relationship between those branches-and, in particular, the traditional axiom that insists on their analytic independence-can and should be preserved in contemporary international law. The issue has been largely neglected …

Full Volume 79: International Law And The War On Terror

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Terrorism And The Use Of Force In International Law, Michael Schmitt

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Waging War For Human Rights: Toward A Moral-Legal Theory Of Humanitarian Intervention, Eric A. Heinze

Human Rights & Human Welfare

A review of:

Hard Choices: Moral Dilemmas in Humanitarian Intervention edited by Jonathan Moore. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. 322pp.

Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal, and Political Dilemmas edited by J. L. Holzgrefe and Robert O. Keohane. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 350pp.

Computer Network Attacks And Self-Defense, Yoram Dinstein

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Computer Network Attack As A Use Of Force Under Article 2(4) Of The United Nations Charter, Daniel B. Silver

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Self-Defense Against Computer Network Attack Under International Law, Horace B. Robertson Jr.

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

The International Legal Implications Of "Non-Lethal" Weapons, David P. Fidler

Michigan Journal of International Law

In this Article, the author attempts a comprehensive international legal analysis of "non-lethal" weapons to raise awareness about how many international legal issues they create and about the complexity of analyzing the international legality of the development and use of these weapons. In short, the emergence of "non-lethal" weapons does not rescue international law from its crisis in connection with controlling war. Indeed, in some respects, the coming of "non-lethal" weapons threatens to deepen that crisis in new and disturbing ways.

Legal Aspects Of Counterinsurgency, J. F. Hogg

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

International Law, The Oas And The Dominican Crisis, Charles G. Fenwick

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Forcible Self-Help In International Law, James J. Mchugh

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Military Justice A Reinforcer Of Discipline, Robert S. Poydasheff

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Collective Intervention And The Law Of The Charter, William O. Miller

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.