This timely new volume brings together experts on the laws of war from academia, the military, and the NGO community to examine the issues surrounding September 11th and its aftermath, which have raised fundamental challenges to the existing corpus of international humanitarian law. The book features a thoughtful overview and discussion of the extent to which "new wars" call for new laws. The authors analyze specific topics pertaining to this theme, including the definition of armed conflict, the identification of military objectives, the meaning and application of the principle of proportionality in contemporary conflicts, the legitimacy of "targeted killings," the treatment of individuals detained in non-traditional armed conflicts, and the contemporary application of the law of occupation. Specific highlights include: Lt. Col. William K. Lietzau, National Defense University and former Special Advisor to the General Counsel of the Department of Defense (DoD), on when to apply the law of war and when to apply a law enforcement paradigm; Yoram Dinstein, Stockton Professor of International Law at the U.S. Naval War College, on proportionality; Crimes of War website editor Anthony Dworkin on due process problems in the anti-terror campaign; Ken Watkin, Visiting Fellow in the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, on targeting and assassination; and much more. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

Modern armed conflict has taken a variety of forms and occurs at a variety of levels, raising serious questions concerning the relationship between the law of armed conflict and the reality of contemporary warfare. Many contemporary armed conflicts are fought in pursuit of unlimited objectives, whereas other modern wars seek to advance limited goals. While in some cases modern wars are fought by traditional armies composed of clearly identifiable soldiers, often modern armed conflicts are waged by guerrilla or partisan fighters whose identities are easily confused with non-combatants. Terrorism is increasingly a characteristic manifestation of this contemporary warfare. In the broadest sense, contemporary warfare has raised often controversial and vexing questions concerning the applicability of the law of armed conflict and, when applicable, the interpretation of its principles and tenets. This engaging volume addresses some of the contemporary normative and legal challenges and problems associated with the application of the concepts of just war, the just conduct of war, and the law of armed conflict to 21st century warfare.

Topics as diverse as the evolving spectrum of conflict, innovations in weaponry, automated and autonomous attack, the depersonalisation of warfare, detention operations, the influence of modern media and the application of human rights law to the conduct of hostilities are examined in this book to see to what extent existing legal norms are challenged. The book takes each topic in turn, explains relevant provisions of contemporary law and analyses exactly where the legal problem lies. The analysis then develops the theme, examining for example the implications of current rules as to deception operations for certain applications of cyber warfare. The text is written in an accessible style, and demonstrates the continuing relevance of established rules and the importance of compliance with them. Useful for academics, military, governments, ministries of defence, ministries of foreign affairs, libraries, diplomats, think tanks, policy units, NGOs, and all others with an interest in law of armed conflict issues such as journalists and students.

Examines the difficulties in applying international law to recent armed conflicts known as 'new wars'.

International law and armed conflict exist in a symbiotic relationship. In some cases, law shapes conflict proactively by imposing normative limits in advance of the appearance of proscribed conduct. Much more commonly, armed conflict either reveals lacunae in the law or demonstrates how law designed for yesterday's wars falls short when applied to contemporary conflict. When that happens, international law reacts by allowing provisions to fall into desuetude, embracing new interpretations of existing prescriptions, or generating new norms through practice or codification. In the 21st Century, both international security and armed conflict are the subject of arguably unprecedented sea changes. As a result, claims that both the" jus ad bellum" and "jus in bello" are unwieldy and ill-fitting in the context of modern hostilities have surfaced prominently. Whether one agrees with such dire assessments, what has become clear is that armed conflict is increasingly exposing faultlines in the law governing the resort to force. The intent of this collection of essays in honour of Professor Yoram Dinstein on the occasion of his 70th birthday is to explore such faultlines, first by identifying them and then by assessing their consequences. In a sense, then, the essays, contributed by the top minds in the field, will serve to assist academics and practitioners to anticipate pressure on the law governing armed conflict and, to the extent possible, react accordingly. Paralleling Professor Dinstein's classic works - "War, Aggression, and Self-Defence and The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of International Armed Conflict "? the book addresses both "ius ad bellum" and "ius in bello" topics.

This monograph is the ninth offering in the Combat Studies Institute's (CSI) Global War On Terrorism (GWOT) Occasional Papers series. The author, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and CSI historian, has produced a study that examines the evolution and continued applicability of the corpus that constitutes the law of war. As background, he provides a theoretical framework and the development of the law within Western and, specifically, U.S. Army doctrine and regulation. He then presents a case study of the British suppression of the Mau Mau insurgency between 1952 and 1960 in Kenya, a conflict with particular resonance today. Some of the more relevant characteristics of the conflict include the clash between Western and non-Western cultures and an initially asymmetric fight between conventional security forces and loosely organized, poorly equipped insurgents. It makes no claim that every lesson learned by the British during that counterinsurgency operation can be directly applied by the United States to the challenges of the GWOT, but this analysis does offer some insight about applying the law of war to an unfamiliar, non-Western environment. The genesis of this study is the public discourse asserting the possibility that the GWOT may require new rules and new law-of-war prescripts. This important discussion is fraught with complexities and long-term implications; the moral force in warfare is incredibly significant and any changes to the legal framework in place must be very carefully considered. Do we follow the law of war to the letter, do we remain consistent with the principles of Geneva, or do we approach the conflict as a new challenge requiring fundamental revisions to the law? According to the author, law-of-war violations are neither necessary nor excusable for successful prosecution of military operations in any environment, and because the law of war in its current form is more than adequate to face the new GWOT challenges, it does not warrant revision.