In Investigating Civilian Casualties Alon Margalit discusses the appropriate response to State-caused fatalities. Highlighting various legal and practical challenges, the State's duty to investigate is considered amid increasing public scrutiny and influence of human rights law during military operations

An allegation is made that a war crime was committed by a soldier during a conflict. Who should investigate the allegation? How should they investigate? This book explores a topic of critical importance in legal and policy discussions surrounding the accountability of military operations in armed conflict, and problematises some presumptions that are often made about the topic. The work provides the international legal framework necessary to address these questions and establishes the precise standards of independence and impartiality as applicable to investigations in armed conflict. It questions the assumption that the standards of independence and impartiality of investigations should be measured in the same way that we measure these standards for judges, courts, and tribunals. It also explores the ways in which military institutions and culture, as well as the context of armed conflict, may impact on the effectiveness of investigations or the perception of justice by those affected. By demonstrating the precise ways in which military investigations can contribute to or hinder the effectiveness of investigations, the book clarifies States’ responsibilities with regard to their accountability efforts for serious violations of international law in armed conflict. The work will be a valuable resource for academics, researchers, and policy-makers working in the areas of international humanitarian law, international human rights law, as well as political science and military ethics.

ŠThis comprehensive collection addresses an overlooked area: war crimes and the conduct of hostilities. It uplifts aspects that are particularly under-appreciated, including cultural property, fact-finding, arms transfer, chemical weapons, sexual viole

This book provides detailed guidance for armed forces and practitioners on the application of international human rights law during armed conflict and its relationship with the law of armed conflict.

This innovative edited collection uncovers the invisible frames which form our understanding of international law. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, it investigates how social cognition and knowledge production processes affect decision-making, and inform unquestioned beliefs about what international law is, and how it works.

This book explores the nature and scope of the provision requiring States to ‘ensure respect’ for international humanitarian law (IHL) contained within Common Article 1 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. It examines the interpretation and application of this provision in a range of contexts, both thematic and country-specific. Accepting the clearly articulated notion of ‘respect’ for IHL, it builds on the existing literature studying the meaning of ‘ensure respect’ and outlines an understanding of the concept in situations such as enacting implementing legislation, diplomatic interactions, regulating private actors, targeting, detaining persons under IHL in non-international armed conflict, protecting civilians (including internally displaced populations) and prosecuting war crimes. It also considers topical issues such as counter-terrorism and foreign fighting. The book will be a valuable resource for practitioners, academics and researchers. It provides much needed practical reflection for States as to what ensuring respect entails, so that governments are able to address these obligations.

A Washington Post Best Book of 2021 ​The #1 New York Times bestselling investigative story of how three successive presidents and their military commanders deceived the public year after year about America’s longest war, foreshadowing the Taliban’s recapture of Afghanistan, by Washington Post reporter and three-time Pulitzer Prize finalist Craig Whitlock. Unlike the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 had near-unanimous public support. At first, the goals were straightforward and clear: defeat al-Qaeda and prevent a repeat of 9/11. Yet soon after the United States and its allies removed the Taliban from power, the mission veered off course and US officials lost sight of their original objectives. Distracted by the war in Iraq, the US military become mired in an unwinnable guerrilla conflict in a country it did not understand. But no president wanted to admit failure, especially in a war that began as a just cause. Instead, the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations sent more and more troops to Afghanistan and repeatedly said they were making progress, even though they knew there was no realistic prospect for an outright victory. Just as the Pentagon Papers changed the public’s understanding of Vietnam, The Afghanistan Papers contains “fast-paced and vivid” (The New York Times Book Review) revelation after revelation from people who played a direct role in the war from leaders in the White House and the Pentagon to soldiers and aid workers on the front lines. In unvarnished language, they admit that the US government’s strategies were a mess, that the nation-building project was a colossal failure, and that drugs and corruption gained a stranglehold over their allies in the Afghan government. All told, the account is based on interviews with more than 1,000 people who knew that the US government was presenting a distorted, and sometimes entirely fabricated, version of the facts on the ground. Documents unearthed by The Washington Post reveal that President Bush didn’t know the name of his Afghanistan war commander—and didn’t want to meet with him. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld admitted that he had “no visibility into who the bad guys are.” His successor, Robert Gates, said: “We didn’t know jack shit about al-Qaeda.” The Afghanistan Papers is a “searing indictment of the deceit, blunders, and hubris of senior military and civilian officials” (Tom Bowman, NRP Pentagon Correspondent) that will supercharge a long-overdue reckoning over what went wrong and forever change the way the conflict is remembered.