"This publication is used as a deskbook for instruction at various commander courses at Air University. It also serves as a helpful reference guide for commanders in the field, providing general guidance and helping commanders to clarify issues and identify potential problem areas."--P. [2] of cover. Intended as a guidebook for commanders in the field who need insight into challenging legal issues in an environment of increasingly complex laws, rules, and regulations both nationally and internationally.

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.

The concept that certain objects and persons may be legitimately attacked during armed conflicts has been well recognised and developed through the history of warfare. This book explores the relationship between international law and targeting practice in determining whether an object is a lawful military target. By examining both the interpretation and its post-ratification application this book provides a comprehensive analysis of the definition of military objective adopted in 1977 Additional Protocol I to the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and its use in practice. Tackling topical issues such as the targeting of TV and radio stations or cyber targets, Agnieszka Jachec-Neale analyses the concept of military objective within the context of both modern military doctrine and the major coalition operations which have been undertaken since it was formally defined. This monograph will be of great interest to students and scholars of international law and the law of armed conflict, as well as security studies and international relations.

Field Command is a first of its kind; a full-length tactical science textbook focused specifically on crisis situations faced by the law enforcement community. It expands on the concepts laid out in Heal's Sound Doctrine: A Tactical Primer. The concepts and principles are taken from tactical texts and military field manuals and are presented as close to how they are used as possible. To facilitate understanding, illustrations are abundant and not only clarify the text but amplify it with new insights and applications.

The idea of military necessity lies at the centre of the law of armed conflict and yet it is less than fully understood. This book analyses which legal limits govern the commander's assessment of military necessity, and argues that military necessity itself is not a limitation. Military necessity calls for a highly discretionary exercise: the assessment. Yet, there is little guidance as to how this discretionary process should be exercised, apart from the notions of 'a reasonable military commander'. A reasonable assessment of 'excessive' civilian losses are presumed to be almost intuitive. Objective standards for determining excessive civilian losses are difficult to identify, particularly when that 'excessiveness' will be understood in relative terms. The perpetual question arises: are civilian losses acceptable if the war can be won? The result is a heavy burden of assessment placed on the shoulders of the military commander.

In 1950, when he commissioned the first edition of The Armed Forces Officer, Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall told its author, S.L.A. Marshall, that "American military officers, of whatever service, should share common ground ethically and morally." In this new edition, the authors methodically explore that common ground, reflecting on the basics of the Profession of Arms, and the officer's special place and distinctive obligations within that profession and especially to the Constitution.