Suchergebnisse

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 the law of armed conflict and other branches of international law, most notably the law of inter-State force and human rights law. This article examines different forms of legal indeterminacy and different legal techniques available to address them, using concrete controversies to illustrate abstract ideas. It defends one view of the purpose of the law of armed conflict and its relationship with other rules of international law. The purpose of the law is not to balance a constraining principle of humanity against an authorizing principle of military necessity. Instead, the purpose of the law is simply to protect persons and objects to the greatest extent practically possible, that is, without depriving other rules of international law, which authorize certain uses of armed force, of practical effect. Finally, it shows that the law of armed conflict contains a number of clues for its own interpretation, some of them hidden in plain sight, including a recurring pattern of general protections with limited exceptions.

Warfare is changing - and rapidly. New technologies, new geopolitical alignments, new interests and vulnerabilities, and other developments are changing how, why, and by whom conflict will be waged. Just as militaries must plan ahead for an environment in which threats, alliances, capabilities, and even the domains in which they fight will differ from today, they must plan for international legal constraints that may differ, too.This volume considers how law and institutions for creating, interpreting, and enforcing it might look two decades ahead - as well as what opportunities may exist to influence it in that time. Such assessment is important as the U.S. and other governments plan for future warfare. It is also important as they formulate strategies for influencing the development of law to better serve security, humanitarian, and other interests. This volume examines not just specific questions, such as how might a particular technology require adaptive interpretation of existing law, but also grand ones, such as whether law is capable at all of keeping up with these changes.

Few areas of international law are as consequential as the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). At its very core, it entails an endeavor to regulate death and destruction both for those who participate in a conflict and for those who are simply affected by the conflict. LOAC is also of continued relevance. The number of armed conflicts around the world does not seem to be on the wane, and thus there is no shortage of situations in which LOAC remains applicable. Just as the law retains its consequence and relevance, the study of LOAC retains its importance. Old questions warrant revisiting, as the nature of conflicts change, new treaties are adopted, and the law continues on its path of development and interpretation. New questions also arise--as contemporary armed conflicts provide complexities that have not always been present in past conflicts--from conflict classification to the individual weapon in the hands of the infantryman.

Warfare is changing - and rapidly. New technologies, new geopolitical alignments, new interests and vulnerabilities, and other developments are changing how, why, and by whom conflict will be waged. Just as militaries must plan ahead for an environment in which threats, alliances, capabilities, and even the domains in which they fight will differ from today, they must plan for international legal constraints that may differ, too. This volume considers how law and institutions for creating, interpreting, and enforcing it might look two decades ahead - as well as what opportunities may exist to influence it in that time. Such assessment is important as the U.S. and other governments plan for future warfare. It is also important as they formulate strategies for influencing the development of law to better serve security, humanitarian, and other interests. This volume examines not just specific questions, such as how might a particular technology require adaptive interpretation of existing law, but also grand ones, such as whether law is capable at all of keeping up with these changes. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1335/thumbnail.jpg

In HisDe Jure Belli ac Paris, Grotius, quoting Cicero, stated that "there is no Middle between War and Peace," and this sentiment seems to have received general agreement well into the twentieth century. Thus, inJansonv.Driefontein Consolidated Mines, Lord Macnaghten stated: "I think the learned counsel for the respondent was right in saying that the law recognises a state of peace and a state of war, but that it knows nothing of an intermediate state which is neither one thing nor the other — neither peace nor war." One might have thought that the English courts would have abandoned this view in the light of their own experience during the Manchukuo incident, for by 1939 inKawasaki Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha of Kobev.Bantham S.S. Co.the Court of Appeal was prepared to concede that "war" might exist for some commercial purposes but not in so far as other legal relationships were concerned.