Scientific Study from the year 2015 in the subject Law - European and International Law, Intellectual Properties, , language: English, abstract: This article examines the legality of tactical nuclear weapons under International Humanitarian Law. Additionally, the ideas behind the development of tactical nuclear weapons as well as their historical background during the Cold War and after 9/11 are examined. Tactical (or 'small') nuclear weapons have been developed during the Cold War and had been deployed e.g. to West Germany for possible use on the battlefield in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. After the end of the Cold War, the dangerous idea that nuclear weapons could be used on the battlefield without triggering a global thermonuclear conflict has remained relevant. It has been discussed e.g. in the context of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear weapons program as one possible way to destroy hardened or underground targets. In this paper the issue of tactical nuclear weapons is approached from the perspective of International Humanitarian Law, the set of rules which govern the conduct of armed forces in conflict.

Nuclear Weapons under International Law is a comprehensive treatment of nuclear weapons under key international law regimes. It critically reviews international law governing nuclear weapons with regard to the inter-state use of force, international humanitarian law, human rights law, disarmament law, and environmental law, and discusses where relevant the International Court of Justice's 1996 Advisory Opinion. Unique in its approach, it draws upon contributions from expert legal scholars and international law practitioners who have worked with conventional and non-conventional arms control and disarmament issues. As a result, this book embraces academic consideration of legal questions within the context of broader political debates about the status of nuclear weapons under international law.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) or the Law of War is a branch of international law that condemns the use of nuclear weapons as being opposed to human principles and morality. This field of international law, as promulgated by the 1949 Geneva Convention, is profoundly anchored in Conventional Treaties, Customary Law, and basic legal concepts. They are outlined in international treaties and military textbooks on "law of armed conflict." The basic standards apply generally as a matter of customary international law and hence bind all governments regardless of their allegiance to a specific treaty. IHL, which applies equally to aggressor and victim states, strives to eliminate cruelty, unnecessary suffering, and devastation, as well as to maintain the potential of achieving a just and lasting peace. Thus, bearing in mind the fundamental principles of International Humanitarian Law, this work attempts to depict and analyse the position of nuclear weapons within the current form of IHL. There has been ongoing investigation into the merits of total destruction of this unconventional type of warfare, and enormous thought has been given to the lex lata laws that apply to nuclear bombs. The book begins with the "International Court of Justice's (ICJ) 1996 Advisory Opinion on The Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion" as its starting point. This book incorporates scholarly analysis of legal issues within the context of wider political arguments over the legal status of nuclear weapons under international law.

" ""The threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law ... There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control."" - Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, 8 July 1996 ""This book shows how courageous states from the developing world, working in concert with visionary lawyers, physicians and other sectors of international civil society, boldly obtained astonishing results from the highest court in the world. The World Court clearly ruled that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is illegal in almost all conceivable circumstances. The Court further underlined the unconditional obligation of the nuclear weapon states to begin and conclude negotiations on nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. It is now up to all of us to determine the follow-up, whatever the opposition. We cannot end this century without clear commitments and steps to eliminate nuclear weapons."" - Razali Ismail, Permanent Representative of Malaysia to the United Nations, President of the United Nations General Assembly, 1996-1997 ""It is not often that a judicial opinion on a given question is both hailed and criticized by participants on all sides of the question. This book, written by a leading member of the team that helped to prepare the case on the illegality of the threat and use of nuclear weapons, explains succinctly what the World Court, and the judges in their separate statements, did and did not say. In so doing, it makes a compelling case for the proposition that the Opinion represents a milestone on the road to nuclear abolition."" - Peter Weiss, Co-President, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms The 20th century has been defined in large part by the unleashing of the terrible destructive power of the atom, and the subsequent struggle to overcome the threat of nuclear annihilation. If humankind survives, the 8 July 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, and the extraordinary process that led up to it, will have played an essential role. The (Il)legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons is a concise yet thorough guide to the case. In straightforward language, it describes the history of this unprecedented initiative and summarizes and explains states' arguments to the Court, the Court's findings, and the separate statements of the judges. The author provides cogent expert analysis and, most importantly, reveals how the opinion imparts hope and points the way to the future: "" The Court has authoritatively interpreted law which states acknowledge they must follow, including humanitarian law protecting civilians from indiscriminate effects of warfare, the United Nations Charter, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The implications are profound: abandonment of reliance on the threat and use of nuclear weapons as an instrument of national policy, and expeditious elimination of nuclear arsenals. The opinion can be cited as an authoritative statement of the law in any political or legal setting - including the United Nations and national courts and parliaments - in which nuclear weapon policies are challenged."" John Burroughs, an attorney for the Western States Legal Foundation in California, served as the legal coordinator for the World Court Project/International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms at the November 1995 hearings before the International Court of Justice. "

This thesis analyzes the legality of nuclear weapons employment under international humanitarian law. Factual background data is given on present strategic and tactical nuclear arsenals; nuclear war strategies; targeting categories; and principle effects of nuclear weapons, including types of nuclear explosions and combined effects of multiple nuclear detonations, including the potential for environmental disaster. The legal framework is then set forth: the sources of humanitarian law (law of war); basic principles of humanitarian law (military necessity, humanity, proportionality, unnecessary suffering, and indiscriminate weapons); sanctions for violations of humanitarian norms; the impact of modern warfare; and a summary of views on the application of humanitarian norms to nuclear weapons. A tripartite analysis of the legality of nuclear weapons use is then made using express international treaty limitations, implied treaty limitations, and limitations from customary humanitarian norms. Pro and con arguments are examined in each area.

International humanitarian law is the law that governs the conduct of participants during armed conflict. This branch of law aims to regulate the means and methods of warfare as well as to provide protections to those who do not, or who no longer, take part in the hostilities. It is one of the oldest branches of international law and one of enduring relevance today. The Oxford Guide to International Humanitarian Law provides a practical yet sophisticated overview of this important area of law. Written by a stellar line up of contributors, drawn from those who not only have extensive practical experience but who are also regarded as leading scholars of the subject, the text offers a comprehensive and authoritative exposition of the field. The Guide provides professionals and advanced students with information and analysis of sufficient depth to enable them to perform their tasks with understanding and confidence. Each chapter illuminates how the law applies in practice, but does not shy away from the important conceptual issues that underpin how the law has developed. It will serve as a first port of call and a regular reference work for those interested in international humanitarian law.

This two-volume book provides a comprehensive analysis of the lawfulness of the use of nuclear weapons, based on existing international law, established facts as to nuclear weapons and their effects, and nuclear weapons policies and plans of the United States. Based on detailed analysis of the facts and law, Professor Moxley shows that the United States’ arguments that uses of nuclear weapons, including low-yield nuclear weapons, could be lawful do not withstand analysis. Moxley opens by examining established rules of international law governing the use of nuclear weapons, first analyzing this body of law based on the United States’ own statements of the matter and then extending the analysis to include requirements of international law that the United States overlooks in its assessment of the lawfulness of potential nuclear weapons uses. He then develops in detail the known facts as to nuclear weapons and their consequences and U.S. policies and plans concerning such matters. He describes the risks of deterrence and the existential nature of the effects of nuclear war on human life and civilization. He proceeds to pull it all together, applying the law to the facts and demonstrating that known nuclear weapons effects cannot comply with such legal requirements as those of distinction, proportionality, necessity, precaution, the corollary requirement of controllability, and the law of reprisal. Moxley shows that, when the United States goes to apply international law to potential nuclear weapons uses, it distorts the law as it has itself articulated it, overlooks law in such areas as causation, risk analysis, mens rea, and per se rules, and disregards known risks as to nuclear weapons effects, including radioactive fallout, nuclear winter, electromagnetic pulses, and potential escalation. He then shows that the policy of deterrence is unlawful because the use of such weapons would be unlawful. Moxley urges that the United States and other nuclear weapons States take heed of the requirements of international law as to nuclear weapons threat and use. He argues that law can be a positive force in society’s addressing existential risks posed by nuclear weapons and the policy of nuclear deterrence.