International Humanitarian Law

International humanitarian law (IHL) also referred to as the laws of armed conflict, is the law that
regulates the conduct of war. It is a branch of international law that seeks to limit the effects of armed
conflict by protecting persons who are not participating in hostilities and by restricting and regulating the
means and methods of warfare available to combatants.

International humanitarian law is inspired by considerations of humanity and the mitigation of human
suffering. It comprises a set of rules, which is established by treaty or custom and that seeks to protect
persons and property/objects that are or may be affected by armed conflict, and it limits the rights of
parties to a conflict to use methods and means of warfare of their choice. Sources of international law
include international agreements (the Geneva Conventions), customary international law, general
principles of nations, and case law. It defines the conduct and responsibilities
of belligerent nations, neutral nations, and individuals engaged in warfare, in relation to each other and
to protected persons, usually meaning non-combatants. It is designed to balance humanitarian concerns
and military necessity, and subjects warfare to the rule of law by limiting its destructive effect and
mitigating human suffering.
Serious violations of international humanitarian law are called war crimes. International humanitarian
law, jus in bello, regulates the conduct of forces when engaged in war or armed conflict. It is distinct
from jus ad bellum which regulates the conduct of engaging in war or armed conflict and includes
the crime of aggression. Together the jus in bello and jus ad bellum comprise the two strands of the laws
of war governing all aspects of international armed conflicts. The law is mandatory for nations bound by
the appropriate treaties. There are also other customary unwritten rules of war, many of which were
explored at the Nuremberg trials. IHL operates on a strict division between rules applicable in
international armed conflict and internal armed conflict.
International humanitarian law is traditionally seen as distinct from international human rights
law (which governs the conduct of a state towards its people), although the two branches of law are
complementary and in some ways overlap.

The Law of Geneva and the Law of The Hague

Modern international humanitarian law is made up of two historical streams:

1. The law of The Hague, referred to in the past as the law of war proper; and
2. The law of Geneva or humanitarian law.
1
The two streams take their names from a number of international conferences which drew up treaties
relating to war and conflict, in particular The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, and the Geneva
Conventions, the first of which was drawn up in 1863. Both deal with jus in bello, which deals with the
question of whether certain practices are acceptable during armed conflict.

The Law of The Hague, or the laws of war proper, "determines the rights and duties of belligerents in the
conduct of operations and limits the choice of means in doing harm". In particular, it concerns itself with

● the definition of combatants;

● establishes rules relating to the means and methods of warfare;

● and examines the issue of military objectives.

Systematic attempts to limit the savagery of warfare only began to develop in the 19th century. Such
concerns were able to build on the changing view of warfare by states influenced by the Age of
Enlightenment. The purpose of warfare was to overcome the enemy state, which could be done by
disabling the enemy combatants. Thus, "the distinction between combatants and civilians, the
requirement that wounded and captured enemy combatants must be treated humanely, and that quarter
must be given, some of the pillars of modern humanitarian law, all follow from this principle".

The Law of Geneva

Fritz Munch sums up historical military practice before 1800: "The essential points seem to be these: In
battle and in towns taken by force, combatants and non-combatants were killed and property was
destroyed or looted." In the 17th century, the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, widely regarded as the founder
or father of public international law, wrote that "wars, for the attainment of their objects, it cannot be
denied, must employ force and terror as their most proper agents".

Humanitarian norms in history

Even in the midst of the carnage of history, however, there have been frequent expressions and
invocation of humanitarian norms for the protection of the victims of armed conflicts: the wounded, the
sick and the shipwrecked. These date back to ancient times.

In the Old Testament, the King of Israel prevents the slaying of the captured, following the Prophet
Elisha's admonition to spare enemy prisoners. In answer to a question from the King, Elisha said, "You
shall not slay them. Would you slay those whom you have taken captive with your sword and with your
bow? Set bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink and go to their master."

In ancient India there are records (the Laws of Manu, for example) describing the types of weapons that
should not be used: "When he fights with his foes in battle, let him not strike with weapons concealed (in
2
wood), nor with (such as are) barbed, poisoned, or the points of which are blazing with fire." There is
also the command not to strike a eunuch nor the enemy "who folds his hands in supplication ... Nor one
who sleeps, nor one who has lost his coat of mail, nor one who is naked, nor one who is disarmed, nor
one who looks on without taking part in the fight."

Islamic law states that "non-combatants who did not take part in fighting such as women, children,
monks and hermits, the aged, blind, and insane" were not to be molested. The first Caliph, Abu Bakr,
proclaimed, "Do not mutilate. Do not kill little children or old men or women. Do not cut off the heads of
palm trees or burn them. Do not cut down fruit trees. Do not slaughter livestock except for food." Islamic
jurists have held that a prisoner should not be killed, as he "cannot be held responsible for mere acts of
belligerency".

Islamic law did not spare all non-combatants, however. In the case of those who refused to convert to
Islam, or to pay an alternative tax, Muslims "were allowed in principle to kill any one of them,
combatants or noncombatants, provided they were not killed treacherously and with mutilation".

Codification of humanitarian norms

The most important antecedent of IHL is the current Armistice Agreement and Regularization of War,
signed and ratified in 1820 between the authorities of the then Government of Great Colombia and the
Chief of the Expeditionary Forces of the Spanish Crown, in the Venezuelan city of Santa Ana de Trujillo.
This treaty was signed under the conflict of Independence, being the first of its kind in the West.

It was not until the second half of the 19th century, however, that a more systematic approach was
initiated. In the United States, a German immigrant, Francis Lieber, drew up a code of conduct in 1863,
which came to be known as the Lieber Code, for the Union Army during the American Civil War. The
Lieber Code included the humane treatment of civilian populations in the areas of conflict, and also
forbade the execution of POWs.

At the same time, the involvement during the Crimean War of a number of such individuals as Florence
Nightingale and Henry Dunant, a Genevese businessman who had worked with wounded soldiers at
the Battle of Solferino, led to more systematic efforts to prevent the suffering of war victims. Dunant
wrote a book, which he titled A Memory of Solferino, in which he described the horrors he had witnessed.
His reports were so shocking that they led to the founding of the International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) in 1863, and the convening of a conference in Geneva in 1864, which drew up the Geneva
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in the Field.

The Law of Geneva is directly inspired by the principle of humanity. It relates to those who are not
participating in the conflict, as well as to military personnel hors de combat. It provides the legal basis
for protection and humanitarian assistance carried out by impartial humanitarian organizations such as
the ICRC. This focus can be found in the Geneva Conventions.

3
Geneva Conventions

The Geneva Conventions are the result of a process that developed in a number of stages between 1864
and 1949. It focused on the protection of civilians and those who can no longer fight in an armed conflict.
As a result of World War II, all four conventions were revised, based on previous revisions and on some
of the 1907 Hague Conventions, and readopted by the international community in 1949. Later
conferences have added provisions prohibiting certain methods of warfare and addressing issues of civil
wars.

The first three Geneva Conventions were revised, expanded, and replaced, and the fourth one was added,
in 1949.

● The Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed

Forces in the Field was adopted in 1864. It was significantly revised and replaced by the 1906
version, the 1929 version, and later the First Geneva Convention of 1949.

● The Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked

Members of Armed Forces at Sea was adopted in 1906. It was significantly revised and replaced by
the Second Geneva Convention of 1949.

● The Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War was adopted in 1929. It was

significantly revised and replaced by the Third Geneva Convention of 1949.

● The Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War was

adopted in 1949.

There are three additional amendment protocols to the Geneva Convention:

1. Protocol I (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and
relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January 2007 it
had been ratified by 167 countries.
2. Protocol II (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and
relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January
2007 it had been ratified by 163 countries.
3. Protocol III (2005): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and
relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem. As of June 2007 it had been
ratified by seventeen countries and signed but not yet ratified by an additional 68.

The Geneva Conventions of 1949 may be seen, therefore, as the result of a process which began in 1864.
Today they have "achieved universal participation with 194 parties". This means that they apply to
almost any international armed conflict. The Additional Protocols, however, have yet to achieve near-
4
universal acceptance, since the United States and several other significant military powers (like Iran,
Israel, India and Pakistan) are currently not parties to them.

Historical convergence between IHL and the laws of war

With the adoption of the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, the two strains of law
began to converge, although provisions focusing on humanity could already be found in the Hague law
(i.e. the protection of certain prisoners of war and civilians in occupied territories). The 1977 Additional
Protocols, relating to the protection of victims in both international and internal conflict, not only
incorporated aspects of both the Law of The Hague and the Law of Geneva, but also important human
rights provisions.

Basic rules of IHL

1. Persons who are hors de combat (outside of combat), and those who are not taking part in
hostilities in a situation of armed conflict (e.g., neutral nationals), shall be protected in all
circumstances.
2. The wounded and the sick shall be cared for and protected by the party to the conflict which has
them in its power. The emblem of the "Red Cross", or of the "Red Crescent," shall be required to
be respected as the sign of protection.
3. Captured persons must be protected against acts of violence and reprisals. They shall have the
right to correspond with their families and to receive relief.
4. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
5. Parties to a conflict do not have an unlimited choice of methods and means of warfare.
6. Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish between combatants and non-combatants.
Attacks shall be directed solely against legitimate military targets.

Additions

International humanitarian law now includes several treaties that outlaw specific weapons. These
conventions were created largely because these weapons cause deaths and injuries long after conflicts
have ended. Unexploded land mines have caused up to 7,000 deaths a year; unexploded bombs,
particularly from cluster bombs that scatter many small "bomblets", have also killed many. An estimated
98% of the victims are civilian; farmers tilling their fields and children who find these explosives have
been common victims. For these reasons, the following conventions have been adopted:

● The Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which

May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (1980), which

prohibits weapons that produce non-detectable fragments, restricts (but does not eliminate) the use
5
 of mines and booby-traps, prohibits attacking civilians with incendiary weapons, prohibits blinding
laser weapons, and requires the warring parties to clear unexploded ordnance at the end of hostilities;

● The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-

Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (1997), also called the Ottawa Treaty or the Mine Ban
Treaty, which completely bans the stockpiling (except to a limited degree, for training purposes) and
use of all anti-personnel land mines;

● The Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (2000), an amendment to

the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), which forbids the enlistment of anyone under the
age of eighteen for armed conflict; and

● The Convention on Cluster Munitions (2008), which prohibits the use of bombs that scatter

bomblets, many of which do not explode and remain dangerous long after a conflict has ended.

International Committee of the Red Cross

The ICRC is the only institution explicitly named under international humanitarian law as a controlling
authority. The legal mandate of the ICRC stems from the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, as well as
from its own Statutes.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is an impartial, neutral, and independent
organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of war
and internal violence and to provide them with assistance.

— Mission of ICRC

Key provisions and principles applicable to civilians

The Fourth Geneva Convention focuses on the civilian population. The two additional protocols adopted
in 1977 extend and strengthen civilian protection in international (AP I) and non-international (AP II)
armed conflict: for example, by introducing the prohibition of direct attacks against civilians. A "civilian"
is defined as "any person not belonging to the armed forces", including non-nationals and
refugees. However, it is accepted that operations may cause civilian casualties. Luis Moreno Ocampo,
chief prosecutor of the international criminal court, wrote in 2006: "International humanitarian law and
the Rome statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even
when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional
attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) ... or an attack is launched on a military
objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to
the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality)."

The provisions and principles of IHL which seek to protect civilians are:
6
IHL provisions and principles protecting civilians

Principle of distinction

The principle of distinction protects civilian population and civilian objects from the effects of military
operations. It requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish at all times, and under all circumstances,
between combatants and military objectives on the one hand, and civilians and civilian objects on the
other; and only to target the former. It also provides that civilians lose such protection should they take a
direct part in hostilities. The principle of distinction has also been found by the ICRC to be reflected in
state practice; it is therefore an established norm of customary international law in both international and
non-international armed conflicts.

Necessity and proportionality

Necessity and proportionality are established principles in humanitarian law. Under IHL, a belligerent
may apply only the amount and kind of force necessary to defeat the enemy. Further, attacks on military
objects must not cause loss of civilian life considered excessive in relation to the direct military
advantage anticipated. Every feasible precaution must be taken by commanders to avoid civilian
casualties. The principle of proportionality has also been found by the ICRC to form part of customary
international law in international and non-international armed conflicts.

Principle of humane treatment

The principle of humane treatment requires that civilians be treated humanely at all times. Common
Article 3 of the GCs prohibits violence to life and person (including cruel treatment and torture), the
taking of hostages, humiliating and degrading treatment, and execution without regular trial against non-
combatants, including persons hors de combat (wounded, sick and shipwrecked). Civilians are entitled to
respect for their physical and mental integrity, their honour, family rights, religious convictions and
practices, and their manners and customs. This principle of humane treatment has been affirmed by the
ICRC as a norm of customary international law, applicable in both international and non-international
armed conflicts.

Principle of non-discrimination

The principle of non-discrimination is a core principle of IHL. Adverse distinction based on race, sex,
nationality, religious belief or political opinion is prohibited in the treatment of prisoners of
war, civilians, and persons hors de combat. All protected persons shall be treated with the same
consideration by parties to the conflict, without distinction based on race, religion, sex or political
opinion. Each and every person affected by armed conflict is entitled to his fundamental rights and
guarantees, without discrimination. The prohibition against adverse distinction is also considered by the
ICRC to form part of customary international law in international and non-international armed conflict.

Women and children

7
Women must be protected from rape, forced prostitution and from any form of indecent assault. Children
under the age of eighteen must not be permitted to take part in hostilities, cannot be evacuated to a
foreign country by a country other than theirs, except temporarily due to a compelling threat to their
health and safety, and if orphaned or separated from their families, must be maintained and receive an
education.

Law of war
The law of war is the component of international law that regulates the conditions for initiating war (jus
ad bellum) and the conduct of warring parties (jus in bello). Laws of war define sovereignty and
nationhood, states and territories, occupation, and other critical terms of law.

Among other issues, modern laws of war address the declarations of war, acceptance of surrender and the
treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the
prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering.

The law of war is considered distinct from other bodies of law—such as the domestic law of a particular
belligerent to a conflict—which may provide additional legal limits to the conduct or justification of war.

Early sources and history

The first traces of a law of war come from the Babylonians. It is the Code of Hammurabi, king of
Babylon, which, 2000 B.C., explains its laws imposing a code of conduct in the event of war:

I prescribe these laws so that the strong do not oppress the weak.

In ancient India, the Mahabharata and the texts of Manou's law urged mercy on unarmed or wounded
enemies. The Bible and the Qur'an also contain rules of respect for the adversary. It is always a matter of
establishing rules that protect civilians and the defeated.

Attempts to define and regulate the conduct of individuals, nations, and other agents in war and to
mitigate the worst effects of war have a long history. The earliest known instances are found in
the Mahabharata and the Old Testament (Torah).

In the Indian subcontinent, the Mahabharata describes a discussion between ruling brothers concerning
what constitutes acceptable behavior on a battlefield, an early example of the rule of proportionality:

One should not attack chariots with cavalry; chariot warriors should attack chariots. One should not assail
someone in distress, neither to scare him nor to defeat him ... War should be waged for the sake of
conquest; one should not be enraged toward an enemy who is not trying to kill him.

8
An example from the Book of Deuteronomy 20:19–20 limits the amount of environmental damage,
allowing only the cutting down of non-fruitful trees for use in the siege operation, while fruitful trees
should be preserved for use as a food source:

When you besiege a city for a long time, making war against it in order to take it, you shall not destroy its
trees by wielding an axe against them. You may eat from them, but you shall not cut them down. Are the
trees in the field human, that they should be besieged by you? Only the trees that you know are not trees
for food you may destroy and cut down, that you may build siegeworks against the city that makes war
with you, until it falls.

Also, Deuteronomy 20:10–12 requires the Israelites to make an offer of conditioned peace to the
opposing party before laying siege to their city, taking the population as servants and forced-laborers
instead, shall they accept the offer.
10
When you draw near to a city to fight against it, offer terms of peace to it. 11And if it responds to you
peaceably and it opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall do forced labour for you and
shall serve you. 12 But if it makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege
it.

Similarly, Deuteronomy 21:10–14 requires that female captives who were forced to marry the victors of a
war, then not desired anymore, be let go wherever they want, and requires them not to be treated as
slaves nor be sold for money:
10
When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your hand and
you take them captive, 11 and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you desire to take her
to be your wife, 12 and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails.
14
After that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you no longer
delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you
treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her."

In the early 7th century, the first Sunni Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, whilst instructing his Muslim army,
laid down rules against the mutilation of corpses, killing children, females and the elderly. He also laid
down rules against environmental harm to trees and slaying of the enemy's animals:

Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit
treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a
woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are
fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have
devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.

9
Furthermore, Sura Al-Baqara 2:190–193 of the Quran requires that in combat Muslims are only allowed
to strike back in self-defense against those who strike against them, but, on the other hand, once the
enemies cease to attack, Muslims are then commanded to stop attacking:

And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist,
then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.

In the history of the early Christian church, many Christian writers considered that Christians could not
be soldiers or fight wars. Augustine of Hippo contradicted this and wrote about 'just war' doctrine, in
which he explained the circumstances when war could or could not be morally justified.

In 697, Adomnan of Iona gathered Kings and church leaders from around Ireland and Scotland to Birr,
where he gave them the 'Law of the Innocents', which banned killing women and children in war, and the
destruction of churches.

In medieval Europe, the Roman Catholic Church also began promulgating teachings on just war,
reflected to some extent in movements such as the Peace and Truce of God. The impulse to restrict the
extent of warfare, and especially protect the lives and property of non-combatants continued with Hugo
Grotius and his attempts to write laws of war.

One of the grievances enumerated in the American Declaration of Independence was that King George
III "has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian Savages whose
known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions".

Modern sources

The modern law of war is made up from three principal sources:

● Lawmaking treaties (or conventions)—see § International treaties on the laws of war below.

● Custom. Not all the law of war derives from or has been incorporated in such treaties, which can

refer to the continuing importance of customary law as articulated by the Martens Clause.
Such customary international law is established by the general practice of nations together with
their acceptance that such practice is required by law.

● General Principles. "Certain fundamental principles provide basic guidance. For instance, the

principles of distinction, proportionality, and necessity, all of which are part of customary
international law, always apply to the use of armed force".

Positive international humanitarian law consists of treaties (international agreements) that directly affect
the laws of war by binding consenting nations and achieving widespread consent.

10
The opposite of positive laws of war is customary laws of war, many of which were explored at
the Nuremberg War Trials. These laws define both the permissive rights of states as well
as prohibitions on their conduct when dealing with irregular forces and non-signatories.

The Treaty of Armistice and Regularization of War signed on November 25 and 26, 1820 between the
president of the Republic of Colombia, Simón Bolívar and the Chief of the Military Forces of
the Spanish Kingdom, Pablo Morillo, is the precursor of the International Humanitarian Law. The Treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed and ratified by the United States and Mexico in 1848, articulates rules for
any future wars, including protection of civilians and treatment of prisoners of war. The Lieber Code,
promulgated by the Union during the American Civil War, was critical in the development of the laws of
land warfare. Historian Geoffrey Best called the period from 1856 to 1909 the law of war's "epoch of
highest repute." The defining aspect of this period was the establishment, by states, of a positive legal or
legislative foundation (i.e., written) superseding a regime based primarily on religion, chivalry, and
customs. It is during this "modern" era that the international conference became the forum for debate and
agreement between states and the "multilateral treaty" served as the positive mechanism for codification.

In addition, the Nuremberg War Trial judgment on "The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes
Against Humanity" held, under the guidelines Nuremberg Principles, that treaties like the Hague
Convention of 1907, having been widely accepted by "all civilised nations" for about half a century, were
by then part of the customary laws of war and binding on all parties whether the party was a signatory to
the specific treaty or not.

Interpretations of international humanitarian law change over time and this also affects the laws of war.
For example, Carla Del Ponte, the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia pointed out in 2001 that although there is no specific treaty ban on the use of depleted
uranium projectiles, there is a developing scientific debate and concern expressed regarding the effect of
the use of such projectiles and it is possible that, in future, there may be a consensus view in international
legal circles that use of such projectiles violates general principles of the law applicable to use of
weapons in armed conflict. This is because in the future it may be the consensus view that depleted
uranium projectiles breach one or more of the following treaties: The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the United Nations Convention
Against Torture; the Geneva Conventions including Protocol I; the Convention on Conventional
Weapons of 1980; the Chemical Weapons Convention; and the Convention on the Physical Protection of
Nuclear Material.

11
Purposes of the laws

It has often been commented that creating laws for something as inherently lawless as war seems like a
lesson in absurdity. But based on the adherence to what amounted to customary international law by
warring parties through the ages, it was believed that codifying laws of war would be beneficial.

Some of the central principles underlying laws of war are:

● Wars should be limited to achieving the political goals that started the war (e.g., territorial control)

and should not include unnecessary destruction.

● Wars should be brought to an end as quickly as possible.

● People and property that do not contribute to the war effort should be protected against unnecessary

destruction and hardship.

To this end, laws of war are intended to mitigate the hardships of war by:

● Protecting both combatants and non-combatants from unnecessary suffering.

● Safeguarding certain fundamental human rights of persons who fall into the hands of the enemy,

particularly prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, children, and civilians.

● Facilitating the restoration of peace.

The idea that there is a right to war concerns, on the one hand, the jus ad bellum, the right to make war or
to enter war, assuming a motive such as to defend oneself from a threat or danger, presupposes a
declaration of war that warns the adversary: war is a loyal act, and on the other hand, jus in bello, the law
of war, the way of making war, which involves behaving as soldiers invested with a mission for which all
violence is not allowed. In any case, the very idea of a right to war is based on an idea of war that can be
defined as an armed conflict, limited in space, limited in time, and by its objectives. War begins with a
declaration (of war), ends with a treaty (of peace) or surrender agreement, an act of sharing, etc.

Principles of the laws of war

Military necessity, along with distinction, proportionality, humanity (sometimes called unnecessary
suffering), and honor (sometimes called chivalry) are the five most commonly cited principles
of international humanitarian law governing the legal use of force in an armed conflict.

Military necessity is governed by several constraints: an attack or action must be intended to help in the
defeat of the enemy; it must be an attack on a legitimate military objective, and the harm caused to

12
civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct
military advantage anticipated.

Distinction is a principle under international humanitarian law governing the legal use of force in an
armed conflict, whereby belligerents must distinguish between combatants and civilians.

Proportionality is a principle under international humanitarian law governing the legal use of force in an
armed conflict, whereby belligerents must make sure that the harm caused to civilians or civilian property
is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected by an attack on a
legitimate military objective.

Humanity. This principle is based in the Hague Conventions restrictions against using arms, projectiles,
or materials calculated to cause suffering or injury manifestly disproportionate to the military advantage
realized by the use of the weapon for legitimate military purposes. In some countries, like the United
States, weapons are reviewed prior to their use in combat to determine if they comply with the law of war
and are not designed to cause unnecessary suffering when used in their intended manner. This principle
also prohibits using an otherwise lawful weapon in a manner that causes unnecessary suffering.

Honour is a principle that demands a certain amount of fairness and mutual respect between adversaries.
Parties to a conflict must accept that their right to adopt means of injuring each other is not unlimited,
they must refrain from taking advantage of the adversary's adherence to the law by falsely claiming the
law's protections, and they must recognize that they are members of a common profession that fights not
out of personal hostility but on behalf of their respective States.

Lawful conduct of belligerent actors

Modern laws of war regarding conduct during war (jus in bello), such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions,
provide that it is unlawful for belligerents to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements.
Article 4(a)(2) of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War provides that
Lawful Combatants are required

● (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

● (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

● (c) That of carrying arms openly; and

● (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

Impersonating enemy combatants by wearing the enemy's uniform is allowed, though fighting in that
uniform is unlawful perfidy, as is the taking of hostages.

13
Combatants also must be commanded by a responsible officer. That is, a commander can be held liable in
a court of law for the improper actions of their subordinates. There is an exception to this if the war came
on so suddenly that there was no time to organize a resistance, e.g. as a result of a foreign occupation.

People parachuting from an aircraft in distress

Modern laws of war, specifically within Protocol I additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions,
prohibits attacking people parachuting from an aircraft in distress regardless of what territory they are
over. Once they land in territory controlled by the enemy, they must be given an opportunity to surrender
before being attacked unless it is apparent that they are engaging in a hostile act or attempting to escape.
This prohibition does not apply to the dropping of airborne troops, special
forces, commandos, spies, saboteurs, liaison officers, and intelligence agents. Thus, such personnel
descending by parachutes are legitimate targets and, therefore, may be attacked, even if their aircraft is in
distress.

Modern laws of war, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, also include prohibitions on
attacking doctors, ambulances or hospital ships displaying a Red Cross, a Red Crescent, Magen David
Adom, Red Crystal, or other emblem related to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
It is also prohibited to fire at a person or vehicle bearing a white flag, since that indicates an intent to
surrender or a desire to communicate.

In either case, people protected by the Red Cross/Crescent/Star or white flag are expected to maintain
neutrality, and may not engage in warlike acts. In fact, engaging in war activities under a protected
symbol is itself a violation of the laws of war known as perfidy. Failure to follow these requirements can
result in the loss of protected status and make the individual violating the requirements a lawful target.

Applicability to states and individuals

The law of war is binding not only upon States as such but also upon individuals and, in particular, the
members of their armed forces. Parties are bound by the laws of war to the extent that such compliance
does not interfere with achieving legitimate military goals. For example, they are obliged to make every
effort to avoid damaging people and property not involved in combat or the war effort, but they are not
guilty of a war crime if a bomb mistakenly or incidentally hits a residential area.

By the same token, combatants that intentionally use protected people or property as human
shields or camouflage are guilty of violations of the laws of war and are responsible for damage to those
that should be protected.

Mercenaries

The use of contracted combatants in warfare has been an especially tricky situation for the laws of war.
Some scholars claim that private security contractors appear so similar to state forces that it is unclear if
14
acts of war are taking place by private or public agents. International law has yet to come to a consensus
on this issue.

Remedies for violations

During conflict, punishment for violating the laws of war may consist of a specific, deliberate and limited
violation of the laws of war in reprisal.

After a conflict ends, persons who have committed or ordered any breach of the laws of war, especially
atrocities, may be held individually accountable for war crimes through process of law. Also, nations that
signed the Geneva Conventions are required to search for, then try and punish, anyone who has
committed or ordered certain "grave breaches" of the laws of war. (Third Geneva Convention, Article
129 and Article 130.)

Combatants who break specific provisions of the laws of war are termed unlawful combatants. Unlawful
combatants who have been captured may lose the status and protections that would otherwise be afforded
to them as prisoners of war, but only after a "competent tribunal" has determined that they are not
eligible for POW status (e.g., Third Geneva Convention, Article 5.) At that point, an unlawful combatant
may be interrogated, tried, imprisoned, and even executed for their violation of the laws of war pursuant
to the domestic law of their captor, but they are still entitled to certain additional protections, including
that they be "treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and
regular trial." (Fourth Geneva Convention Article 5.)

International treaties on the laws of war

List of declarations, conventions, treaties, and judgments on the laws of war:

● 1856 Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law abolished privateering.

● 1863 United States military adopts the Lieber Code, a compilation of extant international norms on

the treatment of civilians assembled by German scholar Franz Lieber.

● 1864 Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed

Forces in the Field.

● 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use of Explosive projectiles under 400 grams

Weight.

● 1874 Project of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War (Brussels

Declaration). Signed in Brussels 27 August. This agreement never entered into force, but formed part
of the basis for the codification of the laws of war at the 1899 Hague Peace Conference.

15
● 1880 Manual of the Laws and Customs of War at Oxford. At its session in Geneva in 1874

the Institute of International Law appointed a committee to study the Brussels Declaration of the
same year and to submit to the Institute its opinion and supplementary proposals on the subject. The
work of the Institute led to the adoption of the Manual in 1880 and it went on to form part of the
basis for the codification of the laws of war at the 1899 Hague Peace Conference.

● 1899 Hague Conventions consisted of three main sections and three additional declarations:

o I – Pacific Settlement of International Disputes

o II – Laws and Customs of War on Land
o III – Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of Principles of Geneva Convention of 1864
o Declaration I – On the Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons
o Declaration II – On the Use of Projectiles the Object of Which is the Diffusion of Asphyxiating
or Deleterious Gases
o Declaration III – On the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body

● 1907 Hague Conventions had thirteen sections, of which twelve were ratified and entered into force,

and two declarations:

o I – The Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
o II – The Limitation of Employment of Force for Recovery of Contract Debts
o III – The Opening of Hostilities
o IV – The Laws and Customs of War on Land
o V – The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land
o VI – The Status of Enemy Merchant Ships at the Outbreak of Hostilities
o VII – The Conversion of Merchant Ships into War-ships
o VIII – The Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines
o IX – Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War
o X – Adaptation to Maritime War of the Principles of the Geneva Convention
o XI – Certain Restrictions with Regard to the Exercise of the Right of Capture in Naval War
o XII – The Creation of an International Prize Court [Not Ratified]*
o XIII – The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War
o Declaration I – extending Declaration II from the 1899 Conference to other types of aircraft
o Declaration II – on the obligatory arbitration

● 1909 London Declaration concerning the Laws of Naval War largely reiterated existing law,

although it showed greater regard to the rights of neutral entities. Never went into effect.

16
● 1922 The Washington Naval Treaty, also known as the Five-Power Treaty (6 February)

● 1923 Hague Draft Rules of Aerial Warfare. Never adopted in a legally binding form.

● 1925 Geneva protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other

Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare.

● 1927–1930 Greco-German arbitration tribunal

● 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact (also known as the Pact of Paris)

● 1929 Geneva Convention, Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war.

● 1929 Geneva Convention on the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick

● 1930 Treaty for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament (22 April)

● 1935 Roerich Pact

● 1936 Second London Naval Treaty (25 March)

● 1938 Amsterdam Draft Convention for the Protection of Civilian Populations Against New Engines

of War. This convention was never ratified.

● 1938 League of Nations declaration for the "Protection of Civilian Populations Against Bombing

From the Air in Case of War"

● 1945 United Nations Charter (entered into force on October 24, 1945)

● 1946 Judgment of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg

● 1947 Nuremberg Principles formulated under UN General Assembly Resolution 177, 21 November

1947

● 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

● 1949 Geneva Convention I for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed

Forces in the Field

● 1949 Geneva Convention II for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and

Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea

● 1949 Geneva Convention III Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War

17
● 1949 Geneva Convention IV Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War

● 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict

● 1971 Zagreb Resolution of the Institute of International Law on Conditions of Application of

Humanitarian Rules of Armed Conflict to Hostilities in which the United Nations Forces May be
Engaged

● 1974 United Nations Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and

Armed Conflict

● 1977 United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of

Environmental Modification Techniques

● 1977 Geneva Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to

the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts

● 1977 Geneva Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to

the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts

● 1978 Red Cross Fundamental Rules of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed

Conflicts

● 1980 United Nations Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional

Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate

Effects (CCW)
o 1980 Protocol I on Non-Detectable Fragments
o 1980 Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other
Devices
o 1980 Protocol III on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons
o 1995 Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons
o 1996 Amended Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps
and Other Devices
o Protocol on Explosive Remnants of War (Protocol V to the 1980 Convention), 28 November
2003 (entered into force 12 November 2006)

● 1994 San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea

● 1994 ICRC/UNGA Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the

Environment in Time of Armed Conflict

18
● 1994 UN Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel.[43]

● 1996 The International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of

Nuclear Weapons

● 1997 Ottawa Treaty - Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and

Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction

● 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (entered into force 1 July 2002)

● 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (entered into force 12

February 2002)

● 2005 Geneva Protocol III Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to

the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem

● 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (entered into force 1 August 2010)

● 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (entered into force 22 January 2021)

19