Welcome. The purpose of our panel this morning is to look at some difficult questions related to nature and the role of international law applicable in non-international conflicts. Most of the world\u27s conflicts today are not international

Crook, John R.

NSU Works

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: PANEL ONINTERNAL CONFLICTSJohn R. Crook*Welcome. The purpose of our panel this morning is to look atsome difficult questions related to nature and the role of international lawapplicable in non-international conflicts. Most of the world's conflictstoday are not international. They take place within the boundaries of asingle state. They often involve contests between the authorities of a stateand other groups who seek power, or between armed groups that do notnecessarily function under state authority. Consider some recent cases:Rwanda, Afghanistan, Angola, Liberia, Chechnya, and Somalia. The listcould go on.Particular circumstances vary widely, but these situations are oftenmarked by great violence and brutality on all sides. Violence is oftendeliberately directed against civilians, prisoners, cultural sites, and othertypes of persons or property that would be protected by the law of war ininternational conflicts.The reason for organizing this panel is my strong belief thatinternational law does not now play an effective role in restraining theseconflicts. There are many reasons for this. I hope we will talk aboutsome of these here. I hope the panel will also have some practicalsuggestions about what can be done. I will sketch a bit of the legalbackground and then introduce our panelists.The most familiar text applicable in all non-international armedconflicts is article 3, common to each of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.'Common article 3 provides that "in the case of armed conflict not of aninternational character occurring in the territory" of a party to one of theGeneva Conventions, each party to the conflict shall observe certainminimum standards. Persons who take no active part in hostilities must betreated humanely: murder and torture are banned, there must be no* Assistant Legal Adviser, United Nations Affairs, Department of State. The views andopinions expressed are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the position of theDepartment of State or of the United States Government.1. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick inArmed Forces in the Field, Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3114, 75 U.N.T.S. 31. Protocol Additionalto the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims ofInternational Armed Conflicts, opened for signature Dec. 12, 1977, 1125 U.N.T.S. 609.ILSA Journal of Int'l & Comparative Lawsummary executions, and so on. By its terms, article 3 seems to apply toboth sides, even those that do not represent a State. But there is athreshold legal question whether a particular situation constitutes an armedconflict triggering common article 3. And, clearly, common article 3 isnot being applied in many situations where it ought to be.Then there is protocol II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.Protocol II was designed to lay down standards of conduct in civil warsituations, but its threshold of application is high. It applies only to armedconflicts between national armed forces and "dissident armed forces orother organized armed groups" that have command structures, that controlterritory, and that can carry out "sustained and concerted militaryoperations." Protocol II has been applied in a few situations; perhaps ourpanelists will have something to say about its strengths and weaknesses.Finally, there is human rights law, both customary andconventional. However, human rights law is subject to a variety ofpossible qualifications or derogation in conflict situations.We have a distinguished and experienced panel to discuss theseissues today. Ambassador Michael J. Matheson is the Acting LegalAdviser of the Department of State. He was a leading figure in developingthe mandates of the International Criminal Tribunals for the FormerYugoslavia and Rwanda. Recently, he led the United States delegationthat successfully negotiated a protocol strengthening the land mineprovisions of the Weapons Convention. Mike will give a short overviewfrom his perspective of a senior United States' government lawyer.Dr. Luke Lee of the Department of State's Refugee and MigrationBureau has done a great deal of work on the special problems of protectionof displaced persons, among the most vulnerable of all groups in internalconflicts.Professor Leslie C. Green has a long and distinguished career as ascholar in this area. Professor Green now holds the Stockton Chair at theNaval War College; I believe he may be the first non-United States citizendo to so. Professor Green will address problems of enforcing the law inthese conflicts.Our last speaker will be Professor Theodore Meron, anotherleading authority in the field, known not least for his remarkable book onthe role of the law of war in Shakespeare's Henry the Fifth. Ted may talkabout current proposals to articulate a set of minimum humanitarianstandards applicable in all situations.492 [Vol. 3:491

Introductory Remarks: Panel On Internal Conflicts

http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1081&context=ilsajournal

Introductory Remarks: Panel On Internal Conflicts

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NSU Works