From Cold War to Cyber War: The Evolution of the International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict over the Last 25 YearsAn Introduction
This book follows the history of the international law of peace and armed conflict over the last 25 years. It highlights both parameters that have remained the same during this time as well as new challenges that this field of international law faces today.
The idea for this book was born at the international conference From Cold War to Cyber War, held in Bochum on 1415 November 2013. The conference celebrated the 150 years anniversary of the Red Cross, the 25 years anniversary of the Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict (IFHV) and also the 20 years anniversary of the Network on Humanitarian Action (NOHA). The conference was so rich in inspiring contributions from both academics and practitioners that organisers and participants decided to combine the results of the conference into an edited book collection on the recent evolvement of the international law of peace and armed conflictthe result of which you hold now in your hand.
In his introductory contribution Perspectives of International Humanitarian Law, Professor Dr. Knut Ipsen (Ruhr-University Bochum) founding father of the IFHV and former President of the Red Crosshighlights the different categories of armed conflict and describes the problems in applying international humanitarian law to these conflicts. He particularly explains the difficulty the expectation of reciprocity meets in asymmetrical armed conflicts. Professor Ipsen also argues it is necessary to apply international humanitarian law in combination with other fields of international law, in particular human rights law, and highlights the general meaning of the rule of law. He finishes by stressing the important role that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has played in promoting international humanitarian law in the past and concludes with a positive outlook for the future of this important field of law.
In the second part, the book turns to a specific tension existing in international law that is as old as international itself but at the same time as topical as ever: the tension between State sovereignty and peoples right to self-determination. Professor Dr. Markku Suksi (bo Akademi University Turku) introduces us to the concept of autonomy in international law. He analyses precisely how this concept has been shaped in several cases over the last few decades. He reflects on the legislative powers of several autonomous entities and analyses the legislation governing Sub-State entities, including the land Islands (Finland), Hong Kong (China), Zanzibar (Tanzania) and Aceh (Indonesia).
Lisa Gow (Ruhr-University Bochum) , a Scottish lawyer by training, takes up these considerations and applies them to the most recent case in which the Scottish people sought to exercise their right to self-determination by establishing a new State. She sheds light on the independence referendum held in September 2014 in Scotland, arguing, that while a majority of Scottish voters answered the question Should Scotland be an independent country? with no, the Scottish people nevertheless gained a stronger form of autonomy from the United Kingdom through the process.
In the third part, the book turns to a relatively new challenge for peace and security: the dramatic effects of man-made climate change, for example increasing armed conflicts over scarcer-growing resources or climate migration. Professor Dr. Pierre Thielbrger (Ruhr-University Bochum) highlights the critique the United Nations Security Council has faced in the past when dealing with this issue, as many States regard climate change as an environmental concern or a development issue rather than a threat to peace and security. He also highlights that, although many of the effects of climate change currently occur at the local or national level, a competence of the Security Council could still be justified (if politically so desired) in several ways. He particularly highlights the nature of climate change as a global prisoners dilemma, meaning that both the cause, and the only possible solution to the problem, lie in the international not the national sphere.
Dr. Kerstin Rosenow-Williams (Ruhr-University Bochum) also looks at the phenomenon of climate change, but from an organizational-sociological, rather than legal, perspective. She follows discussions within humanitarian organizations concerning environmental migration and analyses both the challenges and opportunities in addressing the needs of environmental migrants from a humanitarian perspective. In doing so, she focuses on the positions developed within the Red Cross Movement, the ICRC, and particularly within the International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC).
In the next part, the focus moves on to New Forms of Warfare and Weaponry. Professor Dr. Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne) focuses in his contribution on the applicability of air law in the case of civil use of remotely piloted aviation systems (RPAS). He analyses both the civil uses, in particular surveillance, and military uses, including the killing of combatant forces, of RPAS. Professor Hobe also highlights the legal challenges that the use of these systems pose, including the applicability of international humanitarian law and the protection of fundamental rights through data protection legislation.
In the next contribution, Professor Dr. Robert Kolb (University of Geneva) considers the question, to what extent railway lines used for deportation of civilians may be attacked under international law. Under jus in bello, the attack is difficult to square with article 52(2) of Additional Protocol I of 1977 and related customary international law, which exhaustively provide for the likely objects of attack by belligerents. The contribution then canvasses some arguments as to how an attack could be rendered compatible with international law, considering in particular other legal sources, external to the law on the conduct of hostilities.
Professor Dr. Peter Hilpold (University of Innsbruck) deals with the applicability of article 51 of the UN Charter to asymmetric wars. He underlines that the term asymmetric war is not really a legal term of art in international law. However, in its broadest understanding it comprehensively denotes situations of war where there is a disparity between the factual and the legal situation applying to the various actors. In this sense a divide in the power between the participants would suffice to qualify a situation of war as asymmetric. In his analysis this term clearly relates to the legal qualification of the actors, i.e., to the question whether one or more non-State actors are participating and therefore, whether article 51 of the Charter applies at all. Against this background he considers the category of terrorists, which receives the most attention in both theory and practice.
Professor Dr. Wolfgang Benedek (University Graz) gives an overview of the state of the art in the field of human security research and practice. Since its conception 20 years ago, the concept of human security has seen ups and downs in the United Nations and scholarly literature. However, the United Nations have recently agreed on a definition and the concept is broadly employed in the context of violent and non-violent security issues. While international organizations are still hesitant to use the concept directly, there appear to be various forms of indirect usage. This is in line with an emerging human rights-approach to security and humanitarian action. Whereas challenges remain both on a conceptual and a practical level, there is a growing common understanding of the main characteristics of the concept, which remains an inspiring perspective for many scholars and actors.
