Beginning with an explanation of the traditional tenets of international laws of armed conflict, this book explores the idea that national liberation movements may legitimately resort to the use of force, and examines the application of the humanitarian law of armed conflict in wars of national liberation.

Presents a study of one of the international phenomena of the national liberation movements. This work investigates various aspects of these movements, including their relationship to self-determination, secession, rebellion, the use of force, and terrorism.

This work reconsiders and critically evaluates the complex international legal framework which seeks to regulate wars of national liberation in the light of two fascinating case studies. It tests the effectiveness of both the jus ad bellum and jus in bello aspects of the current legal framework by applying it to self-determination wars waged in the South Moluccas and Aceh by armed groups against Indonesia. The book highlights the various difficulties inherent in the current legal framework as well as the ad hoc and unpredictable practice of States in relation to its application. The work concludes with recommendations on how the current framework should be updated and enhanced so that it can adequately deal with modern self-determination conflicts.

The underlying rationale for the international humanitarian law of war is the protection of individuals and victims of war. This book is a contribution to the study of human rights in general and humanitarian law in particular. It contains detailed information and analysis of the law and practice relating to international armed conflicts involving irregular combatants. The discussion focuses on the most controversial provisions of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions: the classification of wars of national liberation, the treatment of guerrillas and mercenaries upon capture, reprisals, and the question of supervision and implementation in such conflicts. The manuscript on which this book was based was awarded the 1991 Paul Reuter Prize by the International Committee of the Red Cross.

A preliminary definition of international terrorism was agreed by the world community in 1937. Since then, a World War and the Cold War have made any such modern consensus impossible. In particular, the UN principles of equal rights and self-determination of `Peoples' have caused political and juridical confusion, in that liberation fighters who utilize terror methods as one tactic in an overall political strategy to achieve self-determination are frequently termed `terrorists', and are prosecuted as such. In order to regulate wars of self-determination under international law, and to control the means and methods of warfare utilized in them, international humanitarian law (IHL) was extended in 1977 to include armed conflicts for the right to self-determination `as enshrined in ... the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations'. Thus, acts of terrorism perpetrated during armed struggles for self-determination are separable from random acts of international violence and, when perpetrated by states or insurgent forces during wars of self-determination, may be prosecuted under IHL as war crimes. However, although states are obliged to seek out and prosecute the perpetrators of illicit acts of warfare, they rarely do so. Dr Chadwick argues that, should IHL be fully utilized during wars of self-determination, if only for purposes of guidance, the separability of illicit acts of war would enable the international community to reach consensus more easily in regard to a definition of terrorism in general, and a coordination of efforts to deter its occurrence.

This book comprises contributions by leading experts in the field of international humanitarian law on the subject of the categorisation or classification of armed conflict. It is divided into two sections: the first aims to provide the reader with a sound understanding of the legal questions surrounding the classification of hostilities and its consequences; the second includes ten case studies that examine practice in respect of classification. Understanding how classification operates in theory and practice is a precursor to identifying the relevant rules that govern parties to hostilities. With changing forms of armed conflict which may involve multi-national operations, transnational armed groups and organized criminal gangs, the need for clarity of the law is all-important. The case studies selected for analysis are Northern Ireland, DRC, Colombia, Afghanistan (from 2001), Gaza, South Ossetia, Iraq (from 2003), Lebanon (2006), the so-called war against Al-Qaeda, and future trends. The studies explore the legal consequences of classification particularly in respect of the use of force, detention in armed conflict, and the relationship between human rights law and international humanitarian law. The practice identified in the case studies allows the final chapter to draw conclusions as to the state of the law on classification.