Hide metadata

dc.date.accessioned2018-01-09T15:56:41Z
dc.date.available2018-01-09T15:56:41Z
dc.date.created2017-12-14T18:30:59Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/59558
dc.description.abstractArmed conflicts evolve dynamically and the way wars are fought has changed significantly over time. The majority of contemporary armed conflicts involve a multitude of different actors with varying military capabilities. This asymmetry creates an incentive for the inferior party to use war tactics which violate rules of international humanitarian law in order to make up for disadvantages in matters relating to materiel, resources and fighting capacity. This links in with the observation that today’s armed conflicts (“new wars”) are often characterized not only by the objective to gain territory or military victory in the classical sense, but are rather often (also) about achieving independence, identity, ethnic cleansing, or spreading terror and gaining publicity. This being said, the traditional objectives of defeating enemy forces and gaining or maintaining control over territory are still highly relevant, including for non-State parties. For example, for the so-called Islamic State (IS) territorial control is a strategic priority. For State parties engaged in conflict with such groups, the objective is often to contain the threat posed by such tactics, regain and hold territories that such groups may have captured, degrade their ability to mount effective operations and ultimately to defeat them, which includes but is often not limited to a traditional military victory, whereby one side is forced to submit by superior force. Although international humanitarian law has already adapted in certain ways, for example, by providing rules for non-international armed conflicts (NIAC), one needs to keep in mind that IHL was originally designed to deal with interstate wars. What is more, in modern asymmetric armed conflicts the conduct of hostilities increasingly seems to take place in parallel with law enforcement operations. Thus, the central question is the extent to which the rules governing the conduct of hostilities need to be clarified, both in terms of their scope of application and their substantive aspects. Although some sub-aspects of this issue have been examined before, what is still missing is a coherent and more principled approach to the challenges of 21st century warfare. The central focus of the SG lies on the actual rules governing the conduct of hostilities, taking into account the three main areas highlighted above. In this context, it was not the aim of the SG to comprehensively deal with all of the various issues arising in relation to the conduct of hostilities, but to focus on selected issues where the SG felt that there is a need and/or potential for further clarification. Whereas API’s scope of application is limited by virtue of Article 49(3) API, the SG agreed that today it is widely accepted that the customary law rules governing the conduct of hostilities are applicable in all domains of warfare, i.e., land, air, sea as well as outer-space and cyber-space. Therefore, the SG decided to focus on three main issues related to the rules governing the conduct of hostilities: I. The meaning and interpretation of the term “Military Objectives;” II. “The Principle of Proportionality;” and III. “Precautions.”
dc.languageEN
dc.publisherStockton Center for the Study of International Law
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Law Studies
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInternational Law Studies
dc.titleThe 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
dc.typeResearch report
dc.creator.authorZyberi, Gentian
dc.creator.authorGill, Terry
dc.creator.authorGeiss, Robin
dc.creator.authorHeinsch, Robert
dc.creator.authorArimatsu, Louise
dc.creator.authorvan den Boogaard, Jeroen
dc.creator.authorCorn, Geoffrey
dc.creator.authorCryer, Robert
dc.creator.authorDucheine, Paul
dc.creator.authorGarraway, Charles
dc.creator.authorGisel, Laurent
dc.creator.authorvon Heinegg, Wolff Heintschel
dc.creator.authorKleffner, Jann K.
dc.creator.authorKrieger, Heike
dc.creator.authorLar, Oluwabunmi
dc.creator.authorMarauhn, Thilo
dc.creator.authorNakatani, Kazuhiro
dc.creator.authorOlasolo Alonso, Hector
dc.creator.authorPouw, Eric
dc.creator.authorRonen, Yaël
dc.creator.authorSari, Aurel
dc.creator.authorSchmalenbach, Kirsten
dc.creator.authorSchmitt, Michael
dc.creator.authorSivakumaran, Sandesh
dc.creator.authorVenturini, Gabriella
dc.creator.authorWatkin, Ken
cristin.unitcode185,12,7,0
cristin.unitnameNorsk senter for menneskerettigheter
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
dc.identifier.cristin1527674
dc.identifier.pagecount67
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-62232
dc.subject.nviVDP::Folkerett: 344
dc.type.documentRapport
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/59558/2/Challenges%2Bof%2B21st%2BCentury%2BWarfare.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata