Self Determination Terrorism And The International Humanitarian Law Of Armed Conflict

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 discusses the increasing tendency in certain government quarters to incorporate struggles by peoples for their self-determination into the wider anti-terrorist agenda of the post-9/11 era. This tendency distorts the laws of armed conflict and of peace alike. As inter-state anti-terrorist co-operation becomes more extensive, the transaction costs of international peace and security between states increase. Modes of domestic state governance are left increasingly to the vagaries of inter-state non-interference in the domestic affairs of each other. The ‘war on terror’ and an increasingly strict, domestic state law-and-order approach to silence political opponents increases the dangers for civilians, eliminates rights, and generates suspect communities. At the same time, public institutions and private corporations are harnessed into the mechanics of a broad project of prevention and control. Distinctively, the book considers the impact of the recent ‘war on terror’ on the politics of the self-determination of peoples. It draws together issues related to governmental forceful action, an increasing intolerance towards non-state violent acts, the content of international and regional codifications, expansions in state discretion, the encroachment of surveillance powers, and the interaction and overlap between intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Self-Determination in the Post-9/11 Era will be of interest to students and scholars of public international law, criminology, comparative criminal justice, terrorism and national security, politics, international relations, human rights, governance and public policy.

In Civilian or Combatant?: A Challenge for the 21st Century, Anic?e Van Engeland describes how the practice and evolution of warfare have turned international humanitarian law into an enigmatic law that is complex to understand, interpret, and enforce. Van Engeland identifies the challenges that advocates of international humanitarian law face, which range from genocide, asymmetrical warfare, and terrorism to rape as a weapon. The events of 9/11 and the aftermath have put this branch of international law, in particular, the distinction between civilians and combatants, to the test. Van Engeland describes how some analysts have both questioned whether international law can adapt to these issues and challenged international humanitarian law on the basis that it cannot meet today's warfare realities. Van Engeland responds to these critics, reminding readers that international humanitarian law was not drafted to rule on war, but rather to protect victims of war, in particular civilians. Consequently, Van Engeland demonstrates that this branch of international law is in constant evolution. Through a thorough and illustrated analysis, Van Engeland explains how civilians and combatants are still distinguishable, as well as how international humanitarian has been stretched to meet these challenges.

This book is highly topical considering the recent resurgence of violence by the PKK, the incursions into Northern Iraq by the Turkish army and security forces and Turkey's EU accession negotiations. Turkey has become an increasingly important player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. More than two decades of serious conflict in Turkey are proving to be a barrier to improved relations between Turkey and the EU. This book is the first study to fully address the legal and political dimensions of the conflict, and their impact on mechanisms for conflict resolution in the region, offering a scholarly exploration of a debate that is often politically and emotionally highly charged. Kerim Yildiz and Susan Breau look at the practical application of the law of armed conflicts to the ongoing situation in Turkey and Northern Iraq. The application of the law in this region also means addressing larger questions in international law, global politics and conflict resolution. Examples include belligerency in international law, whether the ‘War on Terror’ has resulted in changes to the law of armed conflict and terrorism and conflict resolution. The Kurdish Conflict explores the practical possibilities of conflict resolution in the region, examining the political dynamics of the region, and suggesting where lessons can be drawn from other peace processes, such as in Northern Ireland. This book will be of great value to policy-makers, regional experts, and others interested in international humanitarian law and conflict resolution.

This book offers a thematic and comprehensive account of international humanitarian law by juxtaposing key materials and targeted commentary.

The meaning of armed conflict is reported on by prominent international law scholars from four continents together with perspectives by military historians, soldiers, just war scholars, political scientists, peace studies scholars, and war correspondents, offering a unique interdisciplinary exploration.

Despite the advances made by the international community to outlaw the resort to force by the United Nations Charter, armed conflicts both international and non-international are a fact of every day life. The civilian casualties from such conflicts have assumed catastrophic proportions. Little attention, however, has been paid by scholars to the treatment of noncombatants in armed conflict and the place in international law of the principle fundamental to the law of armed conflict: noncombatant immunity. This work aims to remedy this omission. The author analyses in detail the content of the customary and conventional rules that give effect to this principle, in both international and non-international armed conflict. The importance of such a study is highlighted by the recent Gulf conflict where so many of the States were not bound by the most recent treaty rules protecting noncombatants.

Despite the advances made by the international community to outlaw the resort to force by the United Nations Charter, armed conflicts both international and non-international are a fact of every day life. The civilian casualties from such conflicts have assumed catastrophic proportions. Little attention, however, has been paid by scholars to the treatment of noncombatants in armed conflict and the place in international law of the principle fundamental to the law of armed conflict: noncombatant immunity. This work aims to remedy this omission. The author analyses in detail the content of the customary and conventional rules that give effect to this principle, in both international and non-international armed conflict. The importance of such a study is highlighted by the recent Gulf conflict where so many of the States were not bound by the most recent treaty rules protecting noncombatants.