![]() ![]() This proposal suggests that the ILA form a study group to examine whether the IHL rules governing the conduct of hostilities are still sufficient to regulate these new kinds of conflicts. This links in with the observation that today’s conflicts (‘new wars’) are not characterised mainly by the objective to gain territory or military victory in the classical sense, but are rather about achieving independence, identity, ethnic cleansing of an area, spreading terror and publicity for their cause in the case of terrorist groups. The inherent asymmetry of these conflicts creates a temptation for the inferior party to use war tactics which violate rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) in order to make up for disadvantages in matters relating to materiel, resources and fighters. Rather, the majority of conflicts involve a (militarily) superior party, usually government troops opposed by armed rebel groups, freedom fighters, or terrorist cells – parties which are characterized by their conventionally weaker position. We have witnessed a move away from classical interstate wars towards armed conflicts which are no longer characterized by two equal armies on each side. ![]() Already after World War II, but increasingly with the end of the Cold War, there has been a change in the conduct of armed conflicts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |