Wars of Law

M. Fazal Tanisha

Description

In Wars of Law, Tanisha M. Fazal assesses the unintended consequences of the proliferation of the laws of war for the commencement, conduct, and conclusion of wars over the course of the past one hundred fifty years.Fazal outlines three main arguments: early laws of war favored belligerents, but more recent additions have constrained them; this shift may be attributable to a growing divide between lawmakers and those who must comply with international humanitarian law; and lawmakers have been consistently inattentive to how rebel groups might receive these laws. By using the laws of war strategically, Fazal suggests, belligerents in both interstate and civil wars relate those laws to their big-picture goals. Why have states stopped issuing formal declarations of war? Why have states stopped concluding formal peace treaties? Why are civil wars especially likely to end in peace treaties today? In addressing such questions, Fazal provides a lively and intriguing account of the implications of the laws of war.

Sujets

• International law
• International humanitarian law
• International relations

Informations

• Publié par: Cornell University Press
• Date de parution: 15 mai 2018
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781501719790
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 2 Mo

Extrait

WarsofLaw

WarsofLaw

UnintendedConsequencesinthe Regulation of Armed Conflict

TanishaM.Fazal

CornellUniversityPress Ithaca and London

Copyright©2018byCornellUniversity

Allrightsreserved.Exceptforbriefquotationsinareview,thisbook,or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information, address Cornell University Press, Sage House, 512 East State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850. Visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu

Firstpublished2018byCornellUniversityPress

PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica

LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData Names: Fazal, Tanisha M., author. Title:Warsoflaw:unintendedconsequencesintheregulationofarmed conflict / Tanisha M. Fazal. Description:Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress,2018.|Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017054550 (print) | LCCN 2017057125 (ebook) | ISBN 9781501719806 (epub/mobi) | ISBN 9781501719790 (pdf) | ISBN 9781501719813 | ISBN 9781501719813 (cloth ; alk. paper) Subjects:LCSH:War(Internationallaw)—History.|Humanitarian law—History. | Conflict of laws—History. Classification:LCCKZ6385(ebook)|LCCKZ6385.F392018(print)| DDC 341.6—dc23 LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2017054550

Formyparents,MaydeneandAbul

Acknowledgmentsix

DeclaringWarandPeace

Contents

1.TheProliferationandCodificationoftheLawsofWar11

2.InternationalRecognition,ComplianceCosts, and the Formalities of War38

3.DeclarationsofWarinInterstateWar72

4.CompliancewiththeLawsofWarinInterstateWar109

5.PeaceTreatiesinInterstateWar131

6.DeclarationsofIndependenceinCivilWars161

7.SecessionismandCivilianTargeting192

8.PeaceTreatiesinCivilWar217

Evasion,Engagement,andtheLawsofWar243

1

vi i i Contents

Notes257

References287

Index313

Acknowledgments

Ibeganthisprojectoveradecadeago,intheshadowofSeptember11, 2001. As a newly minted postdoctoral scholar, I observed from afar as US troops deployed to Afghanistan and wondered: why did the United States not declare war? If there was ever a clear-cut case to do so, this seemed to be it. As events unfolded and, in particular, as the infamous “torture memos” came to light, along with then-attorney general Alberto Gonza- les’s dismissive tone regarding the 1949 Geneva Conventions, I was even more puzzled. But as I expanded my scope temporally and geographically, I realized that these kinds of decisions were not limited to the United States. As the standards set by the laws of war rose, states were increas- ingly engaged in legal gymnastics to limit their obligation to comply. Atthesametime,asascholarofsovereignty,Iobservedsecessionist groups in Mexico, Indonesia, and Western Sahara plead with the inter- national community for recognition. They pointed to their capacity to govern, the grievances they had endured, and, increasingly, their own compliance with international law as signs of the merits of their cases.