Spelling suggestions: "subject:"bilitary objectives"" "subject:"hilitary objectives""
1 |
Targeting during armed conflict: a legal analysisHenderson, Ian Scott Unknown Date (has links) (PDF)
This thesis deals with the law applicable to targeting during an armed conflict — in particular, the law concerning military objectives and the rule of proportionality. The law concerning military objectives is further considered in the context of a UN sanctioned military operation.Using the law applicable to Australia as the frame of reference (particularly Additional Protocol I of 1977), the existing treaty law, relevant case law, and the extensive commentary available is analysed. Separate chapters deal with the law concerning human targets, non-human targets, and currently controversial targets (along with effects based operations). Further chapters deal with precautions in attack and proportionality.The law of targeting in the context of United Nations operations is addressed; and in particular, how a United Nations Security Council mandate might affect what objectives are lawful targets.Finally, I put forward a process by which responsibility for individual components of a targeting decision can be analysed. This will allow for the determination of legal responsibility for discrete steps in a targeting decision. This should prove particularly useful in two situations. First, it will enable military commanders to appreciate what needs to be considered in each targeting decision and thereby ensure that somebody is assigned responsibility for each discrete step. Second, in the event of an investigation into an alleged targeting mishap, it will be possible to identify who had, or at least should have had, responsibility for discrete aspects of the overall targeting decision.
|
2 |
La participation directe dans les conflits armés et la notion de combattant : l'externalisation des activités militaires. / The concept of direct participation in hostilities and the notion of combatant : outsourcing of military activitiesKalhor, Alireza 10 May 2013 (has links)
La notion de participation directe aux hostilités n’a jamais été définie de manière précise au regard du droit international humanitaire. Cette ambiguïté a conduit à des interprétations divergentes du concept d’hostilités et des critères juridiques utilisés pour définir une participation directe par opposition à une participation indirecte (effort de guerre).D’ailleurs, les conflits contemporains posent de nouveaux défis quant à la définition et la mise en oeuvre de la notion de la participation directe aux hostilités. Les moyens de guerre de haute technicité (l’attaque de réseaux informatiques) et l’externalisation des forces armées (sociétés militaire privées), illustrent l’imbrication croissante des activités civiles et militaires et la difficulté à identifier précisément qui participe directement aux hostilités et quelles sont les mesures à prendre pour protéger ceux qui n’y participent pas directement. / The notion of direct participation in hostilities has never been precisely defined in international humanitarian law. This ambiguity has led to differing interpretations of the concept of hostilities and legal criteria imply a distinction from direct participation in hostilities as opposed indirect participation (war effort).Indeed, contemporary conflicts have given rise to further challenges in terms of defining and implementing the notion of direct participation in hostilities. The use of high-tech warfare (computer network attack), privatization of the armed forces (private military company), among others, illustrate the increased intermingling of civilian and military activities which make it difficult to determine who is taking a direct part in hostilities and what measures should be taken to protect those who are not directly participating.
|
Page generated in 0.0864 seconds