The 1980 Certain Conventional Weapons Convention

Gary D. Solis

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511757839.018

This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

16 - The 1980 Certain Conventional Weapons Convention

from LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: BATTLEFIELD ISSUES

Gary D. Solis

Show author details

Gary D. Solis: Affiliation:
United States Military Academy

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Two multinational treaties, particularly, have a potential impact on combatants. Violation of either the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property (Chapter 15) or the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) could lead to war crimes charges against soldiers in the field. This chapter examines the CCW, the full title of which is the “Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects.” In the maze of law of armed conflict/international humanitarian law (LOAC/IHL) acronyms, do not confuse the CCW, the Certain Conventional Weapons treaty, with the CWC, the Chemical Weapons Convention (Chapter 17).

Antipersonnel landmines, white phosphorus munitions, laser weapons, flamethrowers, cluster bombs, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) – these weapons and munitions are all subjects of, or are implicated by, the CCW, which seeks to define their lawful and unlawful uses.

Restrictions on weapons are hardly a modern conception. “The epic poem Mahabharatha, [200 b.c.–200 a.d.] forbids the use of ‘hyper-destructive’ weapons: ‘Arjuna, observing the laws of war, refrained from using the pasupathastra…because when the fight was restricted to ordinary conventional weapons, the use of extraordinary or unconventional types was not even moral, let alone in conformity with religion or the recognized rules of warfare.” We twenty-first-century mortals may not know what the pasupathastra was but, out of humanitarian concerns, it went unused in combat.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Law of Armed Conflict
International Humanitarian Law in War
, pp. 577 - 599

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511757839.018 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2010

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

Green, Leslie C., Essays on the Modern Law of War, 2d ed. (Ardsley, NY: Transnational, 1999), 330

Singh, Nagendra, “The Distinguishable Characteristics of the Concept of the Law as it Developed in Ancient India,” in Liber Amicorum for Lord Wilberforce (1987), 93 Google Scholar

Draper, G.I.A.D., “The Interaction of Christianity and Chivalry in the Historical Development of the Law of War,” 5 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (1965), 3, 19Google Scholar

Parks, W. Hays, “Conventional Weapons and Weapons Reviews,” in 8 Yearbook of IHL (2005), 55, 61Google Scholar

Grotius, Hugo, De Jure Belli Ac Pacis, vol. two, Kelsey, Francis W. trans. (Buffalo, NY: William Hein reprint, 1995)

Mathews, Robert J., “The 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons: A Useful Framework Despite Earlier Disappointments,” 844 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (2001), 991, 992Google Scholar

Dinstein, Yoram, The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of International Armed Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 59

Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Doswald-Beck, Louise, eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, Rules (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), Rule 79, at 275

Turns, David, “Weapons in the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law,” 11–2 J. of Conflict & Security L. 201, 227

Roberts, Adam and Guelff, Richard, Documents on the Laws of War, 3d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 517

Lacey, Maj. Michael, “Passage of Amended Protocol II,” The Army Lawyer (March 2000), 7–8Google Scholar

Crook, John R., ed., “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,” 102–1 AJIL (Jan. 2008), 190

,U.K. Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), para. 6.12, fn. 41, at 110

Kalshoven, Frits, Reflections on the Law of War (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), 381

Evans, Lane, “Laser Warfare's Blinding Effect,” Christian Science Monitor, Aug. 15, 1995, 20 Google Scholar

DeVour, Dr. R., “Possible Psychological and Societal Effects of Sudden Permanent Blindness of Military Personnel Caused by Battlefield Use of Laser Weapons,” in Doswald-Beck, Louise, ed., Blinding Weapons (Geneva: ICRC, 1993), 46, 51

Doswald-Beck, Louise, “New Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons,” 312 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (May–June 1996), 272 Google Scholar

Gertz, Bill, “Trial Aims To Tie Russia To Laser Attack,” Washington Times, Oct. 7, 2002, 8 Google Scholar

Jackson, Richard B., “Lasers Are Lawful as Non-Lethal Weapons,” The Army Lawyer (Aug. 2006), 15 Google Scholar

Frommer, Frederic J., “U.S. Boosts Aid for Bomb Removal in Laos,” Washington Post, Dec. 27, 2004, A7 Google Scholar

Maresca, Louis, “A New Protocol on Explosive Remnants of War: The History and Negotiation of Protocol V to the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons,” 856 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (Dec. 2004), 815 Google Scholar

Maslen, Stuart, Explosive Remnants of War (Geneva: ICRC, 2000), 35

Werrell, Kenneth P., Blankets of Fire (Washington: Smithsonian, 1996), 48

Wiebe, Virgil, “Footprints of Death: Cluster Bombs as Indiscriminate Weapons Under International Humanitarian Law,” 22 Mich. J. Int'l L. (2000), 85, 89Google Scholar

McDonnell, Thomas M., “Cluster Bombs Over Kosovo: A Violation of International Law?” 44 Ariz. L. Rev. (2002), 31, 51, 61Google Scholar

Shanker, Thom, “Rights Group Faults U.S. Over Cluster Bombs,” NY Times, Dec. 12, 2003, A12 Google Scholar

Kershner, Isabel, “Israel Won't Prosecute for Use of Cluster Bombs in Lebanon,” NY Times, Dec. 25, 2007, A4 Google Scholar

Borrie, John, “The ‘Long Year’: Emerging International Efforts to Address the Humanitarian Impacts of Cluster Munitions, 2006–2007,” in McCormack, Timothy L.H., ed., YIHL, vol. 10, 2007 (The Hague: Asser Press, 2009), 251, 256

Crook, John R., ed., “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,” 102–4 AJIL (Oct. 2008), 889

Sandoz, Yves, Swinarski, Christophe, and Zimmerman, Bruno, eds., Commentary on the Additional Protocols (Geneva: ICRC/Martinus Nijhoff, 1987), 426

Fenrick, William, “The Conventional Weapons Convention: A Modest but Useful Treaty,” 279 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (1990), 498, 499Google Scholar

Meron, Theodor, The Humanization of International Law (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2006), 85

Cobb, Capt. James T., LaCour, 1st Lt. Christopher A. and Hight, SFC William H., “TF 2–2 in FSE AAR: Indirect Fires in the Battle of Fallujah,” Field Artillery (March–April 2005), 23, 26Google Scholar

MacLeod, I. J. and Rogers, A.P.V., “The Use of White Phosphorous and the Law of War,” in McCormack, Timothy L.H., ed., YIHL (The Hague: Asser Press, 2009), 75, 90

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.