INTL 616 Wk 6

.docx

School

American Military University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

INTL

Subject

Political Science

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by ChancellorHare969

Although international law and the just war tradition have made it seem unavoidable, collateral damage is not something that is "normal" or necessary. Not only is it morally unacceptable when a lot of civilians are murdered, but anticipated collateral damage also constitutes a regular and often variable component of war strategy, yet it is legal. Zehfuss (2012) claims that although the Hague Conventions established the principles governing the consideration of civilians as we know them, the word "citizen" was not officially recognized until the 1977 supplemental protocols to the Geneva Conventions, creating a distinction between civilians and combatants. International legal norms for humanitarian treatment during warfare are established by the supplementary protocols, whereas the Geneva Conventions itself outline the rights and protections granted to non-combatants who satisfy the criteria for protection. Complementing the concept of distinction in instances when military and civilian targets are connected, the collateral damage rule (Proportionality Rule) aims to protect civilians during times of war by giving meaning to it (Bendor & Sela 2015, 530). When those in war follow these established Protocol standards and rules, it politically benefits the United States and provides a moral ground for justifications to civilian casualties, making it more acceptable within governing bodies, as well as society. People begin to perceive us as being barbaric when we are unable to distinguish between combatants and civilians. where we start killing civilians and stop defending the defenseless. Michael Massing's essay "Trial and Error" tells grisly tales of pregnant mothers and their children being killed as well as elderly friends (Primoratz 2012, 62). It further describes the horrifying methods used in these killings. The essay continues by detailing how fathers are teaching their young boys the proper use of machetes (Primoratz 2012, 63). Examining stories such as these demonstrates how the possible unintended consequences of operating unethically and illegally with regard to collateral damage and civilian casualties are becoming acceptable or ethically permissible. Another unwanted effect can be seen by advocates of human rights. Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International (AI) both published reports that documented and analyzed the civilian casualties during "Operation Allied Force." The goal of both reviews was to establish whether these deaths qualified as "collateral damage" under international humanitarian law (Whyte 2017, 137). Although collateral damage is an acceptable consequence of warfare, determining what constitutes a direct target vs an indirect target can be controversial in the sense of ethics and legality. Bendor, Ariel L., and Tal Sela. “How Proportional Is Proportionality?” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13, no. 2 (2015): 530–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mov028. Primoratz, Igor. 2012. Protecting Civilians During Violent Conflict : Theoretical and Practical Issues for the 21st Century . London: Taylor & Francis Group. Accessed January 10, 2024. ProQuest Ebook Central. Whyte, Jessica. "Human Rights and the Collateral Damage of Neoliberalism." Theory & Event 20, no. 1 (2017): 137-151. muse.jhu.edu/article/646849
Zehfuss, M. (2012). Killing Civilians: Thinking the Practice of War. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 14(3), 423-440. https://doi-org.ezproxy1.apus.edu/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00491.x
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help