Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T04:17:59.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Americans think of international humanitarian law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

Brad A. Gutierrez ,
Sarah DeCristofaro  and
Michael Woods
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The United States' foreign policy in the first decade of the twenty-first century and its involvement in armed conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have given rise to a reinvigorated interest in international humanitarian law (IHL), commonly referred to in the United States as the law of armed conflict. Conversations about whether to classify detainees as prisoners of war, debates about what constitutes torture, and numerous surveys attempting to measure the public's knowledge about and views on the rules of war are offering an opportunity to examine Americans' views on IHL. This article will reflect on those views, providing numerous examples to illustrate the complexities encountered when near universally accepted legal standards of conduct are layered upon the fluid and unpredictable realities of modern warfare. The article will also highlight the impact that battlefield activities can have on domestic debates over policy choices and national conscience.

Type
Humanitarian Principles Put at Test
Information
International Review of the Red Cross , Volume 93 , Issue 884: The future of humanitarian action , December 2011 , pp. 1009 - 1034
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 2012

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

1 See Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949 (GC I or First Geneva Convention); Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva, 12 August 1949 (GC II or Second Geneva Convention); Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949 (GC III or Third Geneva Convention); Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949 (GC IV or Fourth Geneva Convention).

2 American Red Cross, ‘Survey on international humanitarian law’, March 2011, research conducted by ORC International, available at: http://www.redcross.org/www-files/Documents/pdf/international/IHL/IHLSurvey.pdf (last visited March 2012).

3 American Society of International Law discussion, ‘The Civil War and the law of war’, 18 May 2011, recording available at: http://www.asil.org/activities_calendar.cfm?action=detail&rec=196 (last visited 17 August 2011).

4 Andrew McCarthy, ‘International law targets American sovereignty’, in National Review Online, accessed at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/213091/international-law-targets-american-sovereignty/andrew-c-mccarthy (last visited December 2011).

5 Muñoz-Rojas, Daniel and Frésard, Jean-Jacques, ‘The Roots of Behaviour in War: Understanding and Preventing IHL Violations’, in International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 86, No. 853, March 2004, pp. 191–192Google Scholar.

6 A complete version of the Lieber Code can be found on numerous websites, including those of the International Committee of the Red Cross, available at: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/110?OpenDocument, and of Yale University Law School, available at: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lieber.asp (last visited March 2012).

7 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Additional Protocol I), 8 June 1977.

8 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-international Armed Conflicts (Additional Protocol II), 8 June 1977.

9 Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Additional Protocol III), 8 December 2005.

10 The Geneva Distinctive Emblems Protection Act 2006 (H.R. 6338), signed by the President, 12 January 2007.

11 See US Senate Treaty Document 109-10, ‘Protocol III to 1949 Geneva Convention and an Amendment and Protocol to 1980 Conventional Weapons Convention’, 109th Congress, 2nd Session, U.S. Government Printing Office, available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CDOC-109tdoc10/html/CDOC-109tdoc10.htm (last visited March 2012).

12 See text of Military Commissions Act of 2006, Section 6(2), available at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf (last visited March 2012). Michael John Garcia also provides an analysis of the law's impact in ‘The War Crimes Act: current issues’, Congressional Research Service RL33662, 22 January 2009, p. 1, available at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33662.pdf (last visited March 2012).

13 Military Commissions Act, above note 12, Section 6(2).

14 See CG III, Art. 4. See also Jay Bybee, ‘Status of Taliban forces under Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949’, Memorandum Opinion to the President, US Department of Justice, 7 February 2002, available at: http://www.justice.gov/olc/2002/pub-artc4potusdetermination.pdf (last visited March 2012).

15 GC III, Art. 4. George Aldrich, writing in the German Red Cross journal, Humanitäres Völkerrecht, in 2002, argued that detained Taliban fighters should be afforded prisoner-of-war status because they are military members of a Party to the conflict as required by the Third Geneva Convention. See his article, ‘The Taliban, Al Qaeda, and the determination of illegal combatants’, available at: http://www.pegc.us/archive/Journals/aldrich_illegal_combatants.pdf (last visited December 2011).

16 Anderson, Marie and Zukauskas, Emily (eds), Operational Law Handbook 2008, The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School, Charlottesville, 2008, p. 26Google Scholar.

17 The American Red Cross survey was conducted on 24–27 February 2011 using two telephone surveys and it included 1,019 adults aged 18 or over and 502 young people aged 12–17. Select variable weighting for adults respondents included age, sex, race, geographic region, and education level. Youth weighting used the same criteria, with the omission of the education level. The margin of error was +/−3.1% at the 95% confidence level for adults and +/−4.4% for the 95% confidence level for the young people.

18 The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, ‘Anxious Americans seek a new direction in United States foreign policy: results of a 2008 survey of public opinion’, p. 12, available at: http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/UserFiles/File/POS_Topline%20Reports/POS%202008/2008%20Public%20Opinion%202008_US%20Survey%20Results.pdf (last visited 17 August 2011).

19 American Red Cross, above note 2.

20 Gronke, Paul and Rejali, Darius, ‘U.S. public opinion on torture, 2001–2009’, in PS: Political Science and Politics, July 2010, p. 437Google Scholar.

21 Ibid., p. 441.

22 Ibid., p. 440.

23 Ibid., p. 439.

24 American Red Cross, above note 2.

25 American Red Cross, above note 2.

26 Ibid.

27 Anderson, Craig A. et al. , ‘The influence of media violence on youth’, in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 4, No. 3, December 2003, p. 81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

28 Freedman, Jonathan, Media Violence and its Effect on Aggression: Assessing the Scientific Evidence, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 2002, p. ixCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Rosa Brooks, remarks made on 3 June 2011 at the United States Institute of Peace for an event to publicize the American Red Cross IHL survey. A full audio of that event can be found at: http://www.usip.org/newsroom/multimedia/audio/ten-years-after-911-evaluating-decade-conflicts-the-rules-war (last visited March 2012).

30 Curran, James, Media and Democracy, Routledge, New York, 2011, p. 70Google Scholar.

31 John Hayes, ‘Films and TV up the ante on graphic torture scenes’, in Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 19 January 2007, available at: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/ae/movies/films-and-tv-up-the-ante-on-graphic-torture-scenes-468338/ (last visited 18 May 2012).

32 See J. Curran, above note 30, p. 69, and Rosa Brooks, ‘The GOP's torture enthusiasts’, in Los Angeles Times, 18 May 2007, available at: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-brooks18may18,0,732795.column (last visited March 2012).

33 See United States presidential debate between candidates Mitt Romney and John McCain, 28 November 2007, available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNf6ubjdYmc&feature=related (last visited March 2012).

34 Brecher, Bob, Torture and the Ticking Time Bomb, Blackwell, Malden, MA, 2007, p. 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 For a full transcript of the debate proceedings, see The American Presidency Project, ‘Republican candidates debate in Spartanburg, South Carolina’, available at: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=97038#axzz1hrizZzUf (last visited March 2012).

36 For a brief summary of some of these cases, see ‘Background information on waterboarding’, available at: http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/background_information_waterboarding.pdf (last visited March 2012).

37 Mary Bruce, ‘Obama says GOP candidates are wrong, waterboarding is “torture” ’, in ABC News Online, 14 November 2011, available at: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/obama-says-gop-candidates-are-wrong-waterboarding-is-torture/ (last visited March 2012).

38 This requirement is found in Articles 47, 48, 127, and 144 of GC I, II, III, and IV respectively.

39 Section 1, Art. 5, para. 1 (B) (c) of the IFRC Constitution, revised and adopted by the VIth Session of the General Assembly, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 23–26 November 1987, available at: http://www.ifrc.org/Global/Governance/Statutory/Constitution_revised-en.pdf (last visited March 2012).

40 Handbook of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Geneva, 2008, p. 522. Details of the American Red Cross EHL programme are available at: http://www.redcross.org/portal/site/en/menuitem.86f46a12f382290517a8f210b80f78a0/?vgnextoid=22874749b48bb110VgnVCM10000089f0870aRCRD (last visited March 2012).

41 See United States Department of Defense Directive 2311.01E, 9 May 2006, updated 15 November 2010, available at: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d2311_01e.pdf (last visited December 2011).

42 American Red Cross, above note 2.

43 Marc Warren, ‘The “fog of law”: the law of armed conflict in Operation Iraqi Freedom’, in Raul A. Pedrozo (ed.), The War in Iraq: A Legal Analysis, International Law Studies Series Vol. 86, United States Naval War College, Newport, RI, 2010, p. 169.

44 Department of Defense, above note 41, Section 5, para. 5.7.2, p. 4.

45 See Marine Corps Order 3300.4, Department of the Navy, United States Marines Headquarters, 20 October 2003, available at: http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/MCO%203300.4.pdf (last visited March 2012).

46 See Air Force Policy Directive 51-4, Department of the Air Force, 4 August 2011, available at: http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/afpd51-4.pdf (last visited March 2012).

47 For information on US service academy curricula, see their respective webpages. The US Naval Academy course NL400, ‘Law for the junior officer’, for example, is a required professional education course for all midshipmen cadets. The Air Force Academy offers two courses, ‘Law 361: modern application of the law of armed conflict (LOAC)’ and ‘Law 466: advanced topics in the law of armed conflict (LOAC)’ to fulfil its IHL training requirements.

48 ‘Final Report of the Independent Panel to Review DoD Detention Operations’, August 2004, p. 91, available at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dod/d20040824finalreport.pdf (last visited March 2012).

49 Ibid.

50 Ibid.

51 M. Warren, above note 43, p. 170.

52 See ‘Legal services support to operational commanders: a summary of observations and lessons from OEF/OIF judge advocates and infantry commanders’, Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned, 3 May 2006, p. 9, available at: http://info.publicintelligence.net/MarinesLegalSupport.pdf (last visited December 2011).

53 American Red Cross, above note 2.

54 The basis for this obligation stems from the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Section II, Art. 3, Para. 2, available at: http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/statutes-en-a5.pdf (last visited March 2012).

55 More information on the ICRC's EHL programme is available at: http://www.ehl.icrc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=49&Itemid=468 (last visited March 2012).

56 See American Red Cross, ‘Exploring humanitarian law: a guide for teachers’, available at: http://ehl.redcross.org (last visited March 2012).

57 See American Red Cross, ‘The American Civil War: a humanitarian perspective’, Lessons and Resources for Teachers and Students, 2010, available at: http://ehl.redcross.org/resources/downloads/CivilWarLessons.pdf (last visited March 2012).

58 American Red Cross, above note 2.

59 For details on USIP's Law of War materials, see their website at: http://www.usip.org/publications/law-war-training-publications-military-and-civilian-leaders (last visited March 2012).

60 Ashish Sumar Sen, ‘Taliban learning first aid from Red Cross workers’, in Washington Times, 26 May 2010, available at: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/26/taliban-learning-first-aid-from-red-cross-workers/?page=all (last visited 18 May 2012) (see comments on 28 May 2010 at 4:12 AM and 27 May 2010 at 4:42 AM).

61 Ibid.

62 See ‘Red Cross lends a hand to the taliban’, in FrumForum, 27 May 2010, available at: http://www.frumforum.com/red-cross-lends-a-hand-to-the-taliban/ (last visited December 2011).

63 The American Red Cross is one of 187 national societies belonging to the International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies. Its primary mission is to respond to humanitarian disasters in the United States and around the world. The ICRC is a Swiss corporation entrusted by the High Party States of the Geneva Conventions to serve as an impartial humanitarian ‘guardian’ of those Conventions that form the basis of IHL. Both organizations are members of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, but with very different humanitarian missions. The American Red Cross neither plays any role nor takes any position on the confidential bilateral relationships that exist between the ICRC and individual states.

64 GC I, Art. 9.

65 GC II, Art. 9.

66 GC III, Art. 9.

67 GC IV, Art. 10.

68 ICRC, ‘First aid and hospital care’, 29 October 2010, available at: http://www.icrc.org/eng/what-we-do/health/first-aid-hospital-care/overview-first-aid-hospital-care.htm (last visited March 2012).

69 CNN World, ‘Red Cross defends helping Taliban treat casualties’, 27 May 2010, available at: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-27/world/afghanistan.red.cross.taliban_1_icrc-kandahar-taliban?_s=PM:WORLD (last visited March 2012).

70 Jon Boone, ‘Red Cross gives first aid lessons to Taliban’, in The Guardian, 25 May 2010, available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/25/red-cross-first-aid-taliban (last visited December 2011).

71 CNN World, above note 69.

72 International Committee of the Red Cross, ‘Afghanistan: ICRC steps up efforts to help the sick and wounded’, operational update, 25 May 2010, available at: http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/update/afghanistan-update-250510.htm (last visited December 2011).

73 J. Boone, above note 70.

74 Fox News, ‘Red Cross teaching Taliban first aid’, 26 May 2010, available at: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4214695/red-cross-teaching-taliban-first-aid/ (last visited 16 August 2011).

75 A. S. Sen, above note 60.

76 Ibid.

77 Terry, Fiona, ‘The International Committee of the Red Cross in Afghanistan: reasserting the neutrality of humanitarian action’, in International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 93, No. 881, March 2011, pp. 173–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 Ibid., p. 186.

79 Anderson, Kenneth, ‘Humanitarian inviolability in crisis: the meaning of impartiality and neutrality for U.N. and NGO agencies following the 2003–2004 Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts’, in Harvard Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 17, 2004, p. 63Google Scholar.

80 Peter Finn and Julie Tate, ‘Guantanamo Bay detainees’ family members may be allowed to visit’, in Washington Post, 11 May 2011, available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/guantanamo-bay-detainees-family-members-may-be-allowed-to-visit/2011/05/11/AFGAMtsG_story.html (last visited December 2011).

81 ‘Family visits at Gitmo?’, recording of 18 May 2011, segment on Southern California Public Radio show AirTalk, available at: http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2011/05/18/19126/family-visits-at-gitmo (last visited March 2012).

82 See comments at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43008249/ (last visited March 2012).

83 GC III, Art. 13, Part II, and Part III, Section 5.

84 GC III, Art. 71.

85 Aeschlimann, Alain, ‘Protection of detainees: ICRC action behind bars’, in International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 87, No. 857, March 2005, p. 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86 M. Anderson and E. Zukauskas, above note 16.

87 GC IV, Art. 4.

88 See A. Aeschlimann, above note 85, p. 116.

89 See GC I/II/III, Art. 9, and GC IV, Art.10.

90 ICRC Regional Delegation for the United States and Canada, ‘News and notes’, February 2009, available at: http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs013/1102236947549/archive/1102427885827.html#LETTER.BLOCK7 (last visited December 2011).

91 ICRC, ‘Persons detained by the US in relation to armed conflict and the fight against terrorism – the role of the ICRC’, 9 January 2012, available at: http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/united-states-detention.htm (last visited March 2012).

92 Ibid.

93 Ibid.

94 Ibid.

95 See Rasmussen Reports, ‘Most voters still support Guantanamo prison, military tribunals for terrorists’, 14 March 2011, available at: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2011/most_voters_still_support_guantanamo_prison_military_tribunals_for_terrorists (last visited March 2012).

96 ADX Florence, ‘Visiting procedures handbook’, available online through the Federal Bureau of Prisons at: http://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/flm/FLM_visit_hours.pdf (last visited March 2012).

97 ICRC, above note 91.

98 United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, Afghanistan Annual Report 2010: Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, Kabul, Afghanistan, March 2011, p. i, available at: http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/human%20rights/March%20PoC%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf (last visited December 2011).

99 Ibid., p. iv.

100 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of an Armed Conflict, The Hague, 14 May 1954, available at: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/400 (last visited March 2012).

101 Greenberg Research, Inc, ‘The people on war report: International Committee of the Red Cross worldwide consultation on the rules of war’, December 1999, p. 62, available online at: http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0758.pdf (last visited March 2012).

102 Ibid., p. 61.

103 International Security Assistance Force Commander Gen. David McKiernan, ‘Tactical directive’ (non-classified excerpts), Kabul, Afghanistan, 30 December 2008, available online at: http://www.nato.int/isaf/docu/official_texts/Tactical%20Directive_090114.pdf (last visited December 2011).

104 International Security Assistance Force Commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal, ‘Revised tactical directive’ (non-classified excerpts), Kabul, Afghanistan, 2 July 2009, available online at: http://www.nato.int/isaf/docu/official_texts/Tactical_Directive_090706.pdf (last visited December 2011).

105 See ‘Editorial: measuring success in Afghanistan’, in The New York Times, 8 June 2009, p. A18, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/opinion/08mon1.html (last visited March 2012).

106 Micah Zenko, ‘Collateral damage in Afghanistan is unavoidable’, in The Guardian, 30 June 2009, available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jun/24/mcchrystal-usa-afghanistan-air-attacks (last visited March 2012).

107 Matthew Bell, ‘McChrystal Apologizes for Afghan civilian deaths’, Public Radio International, 24 February 2010, available at: http://www.pri.org/stories/world/middle-east/mcchrystal-apologizes-for-afghan-civilian-deaths1888.html (last visited March 2012).

108 Senator Patrick Leahy, ‘Press release: protecting Afghan civilians’, 29 June 2010, available at: http://leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=6ade9d06-01eb-4b7a-8fd8-943ff531eddb (last visited March 2012).

109 Diana West, ‘Afghan war rules endanger U.S. troops’, in Washington Examiner, 13 September 2009, available at: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2009/09/diana-west-afghan-war-rules-endanger-us-troops/36582 (last visited 18 May 2012).

110 Roxana Tiron, ‘Lieberman: rules of engagement hurting morale of U.S. troops in Afghanistan’, in The Hill, 4 July 2010, available at: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/107125-lieberman-rules-of-engagement-hurting-troop-morale-in-afghanistan (last visited March 2012).

111 C. J. Chivers, ‘General faces unease among his own troops, too’, in New York Times, 22 June 2010, p. A11, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/23/world/asia/23troops.html (last visited March 2012).

112 Laura King, ‘New U.S. Tactics Said to Reduce Afghan Civilian Deaths’, L.A. Times Online, 28 August 2009, available at: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/28/world/fg-afghan-civilians28 (last visited March 2012).