respect to the Law of Armed Conflict follows a logic of humanity. Every battle won with disrespect to human dignity is, sooner or later, a lost fight;
- Discrimination, also known as Principle of Precaution, imposes to combatants the obligation to distinguish military objectives, which may be attacked, from the civilian population and properties, which may not be the target of any voluntary attack. One of the greatest difficulties when implementing this principle is to find a practical form of distinction between military objectives and civilian properties. Art. 52 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions clarifies: “concerning properties, military objectives are limited to those which for its nature, location, destination or utilization, show an effective military contribution to the military action, and its total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization bring a concrete military advantage”;
- Proportionality, requiring the abstention of an attack in which one can predict that it will cause incidentally losses of human life in the civilian population, wounds to the civilian population, damage to civilian properties, or a group of losses and damage, considered excessive in comparison to the concrete military advantage that is directly expected. The implementation of this principle lies in the adequacy between the means employed and the aimed military result. The execution of the Principle of Proportionality does not exclude the collateral damage that may affect the civilian population or properties, unless they are exaggerated in comparison to the concrete military advantage that is directly expected. Neither does it excludes that some objectives, benefiting from a special protection from an international convention, become military targets, if this convention explicitly mentions the faculty for the attacker to argue the existence of a military necessity to inflict the attack.
Respecting LoAC is a guarantee of efficacy in the accomplishment of the mission. It improves the behavior of the combatant, invigorating the feeling of discipline. It also eases the management and conclusion of a crisis, and the return to peace, in a moment when all these questions are primordial in every intervention abroad.
In the equilibrium between the Principle of Humanity and Military Necessities, the LoAC is in the azimuth of the Principle of Economy of Forces and Means.
In order to be efficient, the LoAC must be respected by the great majority of States, if not all. It must find universality, so it may be accepted by everyone. It must also be rounded by measures of trust, supervision, control and sanction.
In the same way that obligations born from individual and collective morality are implemented voluntarily, and not imposed in a random way, obligations born from Law gather the population of a State that is trying to respect them, and they may be subject, if there’s legal basis, of disciplinary and legal sanctions.
Combatants must respect, in any circumstance, the norms of LoAC. It is not acceptable, in any case, that the deviation of conduct away from them, independent of the context or the mission, even if the adversary does not respect them.
The Commander takes a comprehensive responsibility in this issue, and must assure that the members of the Armed Forces know the subject and implement the obligations that come from it. He is the responsible for the instruction and training of LoAC.
It is a misunderstanding from the Commander to believe that LoAC can be disregarded in the hypothesis that it diminishes military efficiency. There is no such hypothesis, and the reason is simple: when respecting LoAC, the troops become even more efficient, because:
- The shooting that hits non military targets generate an unnecessary waste of means and time in the battlefield, and the demoralization of the troops;
- The support of the civilian population is essential for the solution of any asymmetric conflict, restoring peace in the long term (primordial for Peace Operations);
- The respect for the natural environment helps to the reconstruction of the country in the post-conflict, facilitating the end of the conflict and the disengagement of troops in the field.
In addition to disciplinary measures that may be imposed, the inobservance of the LoAC norms may also conduct to criminal responsibility. The accused may be prosecuted for crimes in federal or military courts, or in international criminal courts, depending on the gravity and extension of the facts.
In conclusion, the soldier, Blue Helmet or not, who wants to understand and use the Law of Armed Conflict during his Mission must follow three basic procedures:
- Trust, because the rules of LoAC support the whole of the military doctrine and are considered in all ranks of hierarchy. The equilibrated development of these rules and its implementation constitute important objectives for countries that respect their international commitments. Also, the high standard behavior of the Peacekeepers may serve as an example for others combatants to learn and apply the same rules and standards;
- Reality, because the respect of the Law of Armed Conflict and the Human Rights Law are among the concerns of disciplined and organized Armed Forces. Even when some norms may seem complex or contradictory, its implementation lies in the respect of values that are important to democratic States, and which they are trying to protect. This implementation is based on the honesty and good faith that guide the Blue Helmet in the accomplishment of his mission;
- Perseverance, because the Law of Armed Conflict is not just a theoretical knowledge, but must become a state of mind that encourages the military institutions and each of its members, in all occasions. A permanent commitment at the strategic level makes that, in all subordinate levels, the soldier realizes that, by knowing and respecting the norms of Armed Conflicts, he is fulfilling his duties.
4. TERRORISM, OLD AND NEW FORMS
The word terror comes from the Latin word terrere, which means to scare. The word and its related terms were used in very different contexts – in the name of a tyrant (for example, Ivan the Terrible, the first Russian Tzar), or periods characterized by violent political instability (for example, the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution), and in sporadic acts of violence known worldwide as international terrorism. The violence is not the main aspect, because violence was committed during the First and the Second World War, and was not at this time considered as terrorism. The violence is not the objective, but the instrument by which one may spread fear (terrorize) in the population of a country.
Spreading fear may be driven by a criminal or political purpose. One way or another, the entire population may become frightened without the use of terrorism. For example, when the cause is a disease, like the Bird Flu from China, that threatened the whole world, or the Mad Cow Disease from France, which frightened even vegetarians, and also the deathly virus Ebola, which caused an epidemy in Central Africa during the 90’s and beginning of the XXth Century. Some people believe that these sicknesses were not entirely natural, but were disseminated, characterizing a case of bioterrorism.
If one assumes that the intention of all terrorist is to widely disseminate fear in the population, there is a common motivation in the criminal offenses they commit. Since there is a common element in terrorism, countering it may be done using common defensive strategies and tactics. Any action that can be taken to reduce fear and anxiety in the population is an efficient counterterrorism tool.
4.1. DEFINITIONS OF TERRORISM
Brian Jenkins defines terrorism as the use or threat of the use of force with the objective of political change. Similarly, FBI defines terrorism as the illegal use of force or violence against people or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or a part of it, with social and political objectives (COUNTERTERRORISM, 2002, p. 16).
The International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (Adopted by the UN General Assembly Resolution 54/109, of 9 December 1999), define terrorism as “criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious body injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular perso
ns, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization, to do or to abstain from doing any act” We find a similar definition in Security Council Resolution 1566 (2004), adopted on 8 October 2004.
In conventional combat, or guerilla/asymmetrical combat, it is possible to distinguish combatants and non-combatants. One may argue that people not involved in combat are also killed during the conflict. In this case they are not the main target of the military action, but a side effect of the attack, called collateral damage. In conventional or guerilla warfare, the objective is to destroy the enemy forces. Armed conflicts may have high or low intensity (that is, occupying or not foreign territory), like many conflicts around the globe, about independence (ex-Soviet Union republics and ex-European colonies), ethnical minorities (in Africa and Oceania) and drug trafficking (Latin America). Armed conflicts may be symmetric (between States) and asymmetric (between a State and rebel groups or factions).
However, targeting non-combatants (through suffer and death) is the core of international terrorism. Due to the secret in which the activity is carried on, the terrorist act is done by a small group of agents, who receive logistical and financial support from
Combating the Good Combat - How to fight Terrorism with a Peacekeeping Mission Page 5