Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Military, War, and Peace
Hamdan, Lebanon, And The Regulation Of Hostilities, Geoffrey S. Corn
Hamdan, Lebanon, And The Regulation Of Hostilities, Geoffrey S. Corn
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
For more than fifty years following the 1949 revision of the Geneva Conventions, legal scholars, government experts, and military practitioners understood the articles that defined when the protections of these treaties came into force--Common Articles 2 and 3--as the exclusive criteria which triggered the laws of war. From these two articles emerged an "either/or" law-applicability paradigm: inter-state, or international, armed conflicts triggered the full corpus of the laws of war, whereas intra-state, or internal, armed conflicts triggered the limited humanitarian protection reflected in the terms of Common Article 3. Because many military operations during the past two decades did not …
Westmoreland V. Cbs: The Law Of War And The Order Of Battle Controversy, Stephen B. Young
Westmoreland V. Cbs: The Law Of War And The Order Of Battle Controversy, Stephen B. Young
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
This Article will contend that the law of war obligated Westmoreland to accept lower numbers for the military Order of Battle because the persons under consideration for inclusion were arguably noncombatant civilians entitled to the protections that the law of war reserved for nonbelligerents. To support this conclusion, this Article will first discuss the necessary distinction, as embodied in the law of war, between combatants and noncombatants. Next, it will discuss the circumstances of combat that Westmoreland discovered when United States forces entered the war to fight one-on-one with Vietnamese Communist units. It will then discuss Westmoreland's personal obligations under …
Chemical And Biological Warfare: Focus On Asia, Lee D. Klein
Chemical And Biological Warfare: Focus On Asia, Lee D. Klein
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
This Note concludes that (1) the Geneva Protocol of 1925 and the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972 provide conventional restraints upon the use of lethal or seriously injurious CBWs; (2) modern treaties, customs, judicial decisions, and writings form a public international law norm that imposes a legal restraint limiting the use of lethal or seriously injurious CBWs and binding all states regardless of their acceptance of conventional prohibitions; and (3) the law of war today is characterized more accurately as the "law of armed conflict," because it must of necessity apply to conflicts that are not purely interstate. Before discussing …