As the proverbial dust settles over the battlefields of southern Lebanon, a major change in the landscape of legal regulation of warfare is taking hold. This change, first exposed by the military operations launched by the United States against Al Qaeda, has led to the widespread expectation that conflicts between states and transnational non-state entities must be governed by the laws of war, a body of international law historically applied to conflicts between states. While the extent of combat and associated destruction witnessed by the world in the recent conflict between Israel and Hezbollah may suggest that such a proposition is unremarkable, and perhaps even essential, it in fact represents a fundamental shift in the traditionally understood paradigm of law of war applicability.
Throughout history, professional armed forces have observed limits on wartime conduct. For centuries, these limits were often self-imposed, taking the form of internal codes of conduct. These limits, or "rules," gradually ripened into accepted norms of customary international law ...
To read the rest, sign up to try World Politics Review
- TWO WEEKS FREE.
- Cancel any time.
- After two weeks, just $9 monthly or $59/year.
Request a free trial for your office or school. Everyone at a given site can get access through our institutional subscriptions.
- The Realist Prism: China the Likely Winner if U.S. Intervenes in Syria
- Russia Tries to Manage Arab Awakening From the Outside
- The Realist Prism: Narrowed Focus in U.S.-Russia Relations Proves Productive
- World Citizen: Israel’s Syria Strike Reflects Favorable Cost-Benefit Calculus
- As U.S. Leaves Afghanistan, India Reconsiders Iran Policy