Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T19:23:01.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Law Applicable to Targeting and Proportionality after Operation Allied Force: a View from the Outside1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

W. J. Fenrick
Get access

Extract

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states conducted a bombing campaign, referred to as Operation Allied Force, against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) from 24 March to 9 June 1999. The conduct of the bombing campaign has been subjected to a degree of outside scrutiny, particular by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Office of the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (OTP ICTY). This outside scrutiny process is not unprecedented. In particular, following the Gulf Conflict of 1990–91, Human Rights Watch produced a study entitled ‘Needless Deaths in the Gulf War’ and Greenpeace produced ‘On Impact: Modern Warfare and the Environment, A Case Study of the Gulf War.’ In addition, the United States Department of Defence (USDOD), which was not an outside scrutineer, produced a Report to Congress on the Conduct of the Persian Gulf War which included an Appendix O on ‘The Role of the Law of War.’

Type
Articles
Information
Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law , Volume 3 , December 2000 , pp. 53 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Instituut and the Authors 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

3. Garner, J.W., International Law and the World War (2v) (London, Longmans 1920)Google Scholar; Padelford, N., International Law and Diplomacy in the Spanish Civil Strife (New York, Macmillan 1939)Google Scholar.

4. ‘Needless Deaths in the Gulf War: Civilian Casualties During the Air Campaign and Violations of the Laws of War’ (New York, Human Rights Watch 1991).

5. Arkin, W.M., Durrant, D. and Cherni, M., On Impact: Modern Warfare and the Environment — A Case Study of the Gulf War (London, Greenpeace 1991)Google Scholar.

6. USDOD, Conduct of the Persian Gulf War: Final Report to Congress, Appendix O — The Role of the Law of War (10 April 1992) 31 ILM (1992) p. 612Google Scholar.

7. Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign (New York, Human Rights Watch 02 2000) p. 13. Vol 12, No. 1 (D)Google Scholar

8. Ibid., p. 3.

9. ‘Collateral Damage’ or Unlawful Killings? Violations of the Laws of War by NATO During Operation Allied Force (London, Amnesty International 06 2000) pp. 27–28Google Scholar.

10. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY): Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (8 06 2000) 39 ILM (2000) pp. 1257 at 1282–1283Google Scholar.

11. Simma, B., ‘NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects’, 10 EJIL (1999) p. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cassesse, A., ‘Ex iniuria ius oritur: Are We Moving towards International Legitimation of Forcible Humanitarian Countermeasures in the World Community?’ 10 EJIL (1999) p. 23CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cassese, A., ‘A Follow-Up: Forcible Humanitarian Countermeasures and Opinio Necessitatis’, 10 EJIL (1999) p. 791CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Charney, J.L., Chinkin, C.M., Falk, R.A., Reisman, W.M., ‘Editorial Comments’, 93 AJIL (1999) p. 824Google Scholar.

12. Dunlap, C.J., ‘The End of Innocence: Rethinking Non-combatancy in the Post-Kosovo Era’, Strategic Review (Summer 2000) p. 4Google Scholar.

13. The Hostages Case (List) 11 TWC pp. 759 at 1246–1248,8 LRTWC pp. 34 at 59–60; The Justice Case (Alstotter) 3 TWC pp. 3 at 1026–1027, 6 LRTWC p. 89; and The Zutke Case 14 LRTWC p. 139.

14. The Hostages Case, ibid. 8 LRTWC pp. 59–60.

15. Lauterpacht, H., ed., Oppenheim's International Law, 7th ed., (London, Longmans 1952) Vol. II at pp. 217–222Google Scholar; Bowett, D.W., United Nations Forces (New York, Praeger 1964) at pp. 493–499Google Scholar; and Green, L.C., The Contemporary Law of Armed Conflict (Manchester, Manchester University 1993) at p. 54Google Scholar.

16. Green, ibid., at p. 54.

17. Dunlap, loc. cit. n. 12, at p. 9.

18. The Prosecutor v. Kupreskić et al, ICTY Case No. IT-95–16-T, Judgment, 14 January 2000.

19. Ibid., at para. 526.

20. The Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, ICTY Case No. IT-95–14-T, Judgement, 3 March 2000.

21. Ibid., at para. 551.

22. Ibid., at para. 512.

23. Ibid., at para. 407–410.

24. Ibid., at para. 407.

25. The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, ICTY Case No. IT-98–29.

26. Figures from NATO quoted in UKMOD, Kosovo: An Account of the Crisis (updated to 21/12/99).

27. Washington Post, 21 09 1999, p. A–1Google Scholar, cited in Cordesman, A. H., The Lessons and Non-Lessons of the Air and Missile Campaign in Kosovo (http://www.csis.org) (09 1999) p. 21Google Scholar.

28. Cordesman, ibid., at p. 24.

29. Cohen, , Shelton Joint Statement on Kosovo After Action Review in the US Mission to NATO Security Issues Diges (14 10 1999) at p. 6Google Scholar.

30. Kosovo One Year On http://www/nato.int/kosovo/rep2000, 21 March 2000.

31. Crawford, J.W., ‘The Law of Noncombatant Immunity and the Targeting of National Electrical Power Systems’, 21 Fletcher Forum of World Affairs (1997) pp. 101 at 101–102Google Scholar.

32. Reid, T.R., ‘British Bombs Were Hit and Miss During Kosovo War’, Washington Post (16 08 2000) p. A36Google Scholar. Laser guided bombs dropped by RAF had confirmed hit rates of around 65 percent. Sallot, J., ‘Canadian Pilots Killed Civilians: Commanders’, Toronto Globe and Mail (22 05 2000) p. A1Google Scholar. The Canadian Government acknowledged that 28 percent of the laser guided bombs dropped by Canadian pilots missed their targets. ‘That means about 100 of the 361 laser-guided bombs exploded somewhere other than on a military target.’

33. Cordesman, supra n. 27, at pp. 97–98.

34. ‘The Kosovo Cover-Up’, Newsweek (15 05 2000) at pp. 19–24Google Scholar.

35. Human Rights Watch, supra n. 7, at p. 5.

36. NATO Crimes in Yugoslavia, Documentary Evidence, 24 03 — 10 06 1999 (Belgrade, Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1999) (2 v)Google Scholar.

37. All figures, except those from Operation Allied Force, are from the table in Parks, W.H., ‘Air War and the Law of War’, 32 Air Force LR (1990) pp. 1 at 154Google Scholar.

38. Parks, W.H., ‘‘Precision’ and ‘Area’ Bombing: Who Did Which, and When?’ 18 Journal of Strategic Studies (1995) p. 145CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. Parks, loc. cit. n. 37, at p. 55.

40. Lists of a sort were referred to or incorporated in Hague Convention (IX) of 1907 concerning Naval Bombardment, the 1923 Hague Air Warfare Rules (unratified) and the 1954 Hague Cultural Property Convention. The ICRC drew up a proposed list in 1956 which is quoted verbatim in Sandoz, Y., Swinarski, C., Zimmerman, B., eds., Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Geneva, ICRC 1987) pp. 632–633Google Scholar.

41. Hague Convention IX in Schindler, D. and Toman, J., eds., The Laws of Armed Conflicts, 2nd edn. (Alphen ad Rijn, Sijthoff & Noordhoff 1981) p. 724Google Scholar.

42. Hague Cultural Property Convention, in ibid., at p. 666.

43. Edinburgh Resolution, in op. cit. n. 41, at p. 201.

44. San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (San Remo, International Institute of Humanitarian Law 1995)Google Scholar.

45. Kuehl, D.T., ‘Airpower vs. Electricity: Electric Power as a Target for Strategic Air Operations’, 18 Journal of Strategic Studies (1995) p. 237CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46. Ibid., p. 251.

47. Crawford, loc. cit. n. 31.

48. Ibid., p. 110.

49. Ibid., at pp. 114–115.

50. Supra nn. 29 and 30.

51. Parks, loc. cit. n. 37, at p. 55.

52. Murray, W., Air War in the Persian Gulf (Baltimore, Nautical & Aviation 1995) p. 32Google Scholar.

53. Supra n. 42.

54. Sandoz et al, op. cit. n. 40.

55. Aldrich, G., ‘Yugoslavia's Television Studios as Military Objectives’, 1 Int LF (1999) pp. 149, 149–150Google Scholar; Meron, T., ‘The Humanization of Humanitarian Law’, 94 AJIL (2000) pp. 239, 275CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56. Amnesty International, supra n. 9, pp. 41–48.

57. IMT Judgment, 41 AJIL (1947) p. 328Google Scholar.

58. European Court of Human Rights, Banković and Others v. The Contracting States also parties to the North Atlantic Treaty (applicant's submission, 2000)Google Scholar.

59. Steele, J., ‘The Ultimate Sacrifice’, The Guardian (23 10 2000) at p. 9Google Scholar.

60. Supra n. 29.

61. Op. cit. n. 33, pp. 97–98.

62. Parks, W.H., ‘The Protection of Civilians from Air Warfare’, 27 Is. YBHR (1997) p. 65Google Scholar.

63. Parks, loc. cit. n. 37, pp. 135–45.

64. Human Rights Watch, supra n. 4; Gardam, J.G., ‘Proportionality and Force in International Law’, 87 AJ1L (1993) pp. 391–404, 413Google Scholar.

65. Hampson, F., ‘Means and Methods of Warfare in the Conflict in the Gulf’, in Rowe, P., ed., The Gulf War 1990–91 in International and English Law (London, Routledge 1993) pp. 89, 100Google Scholar.

66. Dunlap, loc. cit. n. 12.

67. Rowe, P., ‘Kosovo 1999: The Air Campaign’, 82 IRRC (2000) pp. 147, 162Google Scholar.

68. Ibid., p. 160.

69. BLU-114/B ‘Soft-Bomb’: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/blu-114.htm.

70. Cordesman, op. cit. n. 27, at p. 77.

71. Ibid., at pp. 77–78.

72. Amnesty International Report, supra n. 9, at pp. 54–56; ICTY OPT Report, supra n. 10, at pp. 1280–1281.

73. Amnesty International Report, supra n. 9, pp. 50–53.

74. Human Rights Watch Report, supra n. 5, at pp. 26–27; Amnesty International Report, supra n. 9, at pp. 41–48; ICTY OPT Report, supra n. 10, at pp. 1277–1280.

75. Amnesty International, supra n. 9, at pp. 30–33; ICTY OPT Report, supra n. 10, at pp. 1273–1275.

76. Human Rights Watch, supra n. 4, at pp. 22–23; Amnesty International, ibid., at pp. 33–41; ICTY OPT Report, supra n. 10, at pp. 1275–1277.

77. Amnesty International, ibid., at pp. 16–17.

78. Rogers, A.P.V., ‘Zero-Casualty Warfare’, 82 IRRC (2000) pp. 165, 179Google Scholar.

79. See table 2.