International Law Frameworks: Exam Two

Front 1

what are the three core principles for a just war

Back 1

just cause, legit authorities, specific fault or cause

Front 2

what are the seven principles put forth by aquienas for a just war

Back 2

just cause, legit authorities, specific fault or cause, protection of the innocents, proportionality, must have a chance for victory, last result.

Front 3

Privilaged combatant: Uniformed, authorized solider: 4 things

Back 3

You need 4 things:

Chain of command.
Fixed emblum/ signia/flag (signle that you're allowed on the battlefield, and prevent friendly fire)
You carry arms openly.
You obey the laws and customs of war

Front 4

What five new things came out of the pause in international relations after the cold war.

Back 4

1) A shift in the geography of national security: implicit in the strategy is that traditonally the states acted predictable rules; the principle dangers were transnational in nature; disease, terrorism, natural disasters. (National security threats are defined more by the fualtlines between territories rather than boarders. Empty spaces create hell) No longer based on states fighting other states
2) A new moral code for intervention. Nixoinan Realism vs. Trumanesc intervention. Are you a restrictionalist or are you a maximalist. They sad that now America should seek a balance of power that favors freedom; interventionilist stance. (you break It, you buy it) Rumsfield: a doctrine that lay out a blueprint of the US would do after interveneing; construct a balance of power that supports freedom. Democratic peace theory. America would be safer if there were more deomocracies hanging around.
3) There was a new structure of world politics; for centuries, it has been defined by great power riverilies. Every international event of note was a function of states or groups fighting each other. Alliances were defined for us. In response to the other power. Now you have the ability to build issue based alliances. What they were trying to do was build collitions built around a single issue. PSI is this- an issue spefic collition.
4) Multilateralism was pushed

A different conceptionalism of how to face threats. There was a predictable pattern of esclation before. The greatest threats came from large states with massive industries and armies. The Bush administration concieved of threats that moved very quickly and without structure. Trip-wire policy was wanted.

Front 5

What is Vertical proliveration:

Back 5

nations work on their own arsonels and controls it's allies.

Front 6

what is Horizontal proliferation:

Back 6

the transfer of WMD componets and know how between states.

Front 7

What did Regan add to the Montidayo criteria

Back 7

The Regan doctrine viewed force as a legitmate use when over throwing a government for human rights, if a state is interfering, if it's undermining another state, to topple a communist government/prevent a commy from taking power,
This fundementally added another thing to the Montidayo criteria: "do you have concent of the government" and if you don't, then the law is elastic and you can intervene to restore democracy.
This emerged as a counterweight to soviet's desires

Front 8

Humanitarian intervention:

Back 8

Where the UN doesn't authorize it, but does not prohibit it either
They haven't ruled against anticiptory self defense: why? They can rule only if they have an unanomous vote
It's not explicitly dealt with, although self determination is.
Humanitarian internvention relies on the use of economic or miltiary force by one state on the territory of another for humanitarian reasons; hostages, aid, ect. When states engage in this, it follows a very important rule: you're not supposed to sway a conflict one way or another. You invoke it out of aulteralism. Only humanitarian intervention if it doesn't shape the outcome of a conflict.
You can protect refugee camps. But not fight against people

Front 9

What are the Two dominate schools of thought for how the US sees itself:

Back 9

"Maximilists: allowed to do what has been authorized and more. (clinton, GWBush,)
Restrictionalists: you believe that article 51; which impowers self defenses; validates it only in response to self defense, and you obsorb the definition and act within the confines of the requirements Restrictionalists believe that which ahs not been authorized is forbidden (Bush Senior, Nixon)

Maximilists: use the charter as a jumping off point. Individualistic: mold the legal framework to suit plitical ends
Restricitonalists: these are the rules, and we will follow. Communial: mold political ends to meet the legan framework

Front 10

What are the three Catergories of Conflict:

Back 10

1) International: between countries. Everyone's business.
2) Internal: civil. Domestic law applies. We have to stay the hell out of their business. Countries have absolute rights within territory. No body's business
3) Internal with internatioanl characters: Wars of National liberation. (the end of the old order is not a prerequsit for our own order) Must still reach privilaged combatancy rule
Palastine does nto fit this; it requires the destruction of Israel.
Self-determination movements must act like the government they want to be; obay the rules of war.
Chechnia: started off as a self-determination movement, turned into terrorism, and the little international support dropped: it's all very fluid.
International legitmacy is lost when the forces uses tactics that are terorist

Front 11

What is Combatant's privilage:

Back 11

Beliegerants are not public enmies- are doing things that are following legitimate military orders, and as a result, are not individually criminally liable for the people they have killed. You won't get processuted if you kill someone in combat.
Statute of Rome doesn't support this

Front 12

What conditions do
Hospitals and safety zone have to fufil

Back 12

A small part of the territory
Far removed and free of military objective
Not situated in areas that are foreseable to being important to the war
Thinnly populated

Front 13

What are the Regulation of methods and means of warfare:
principles: .

Back 13

1) We economize on the use of force in order to minimum desctrution of shared values. Scorched earth just means bad blood and a perminant use of warfare. You don't want grudges.
2) Methods and means of injury not unlimited. We are not allowed to use chemicals or poisoned weapons or weaponst hat cause unnecessary suffering, misuse protected signs, attacks on civvys = discrimination; you have to descriminate over what targets you pick in order to be effective
3) Necessity: authorizing only the distruciton of that which is relevent and proportunate to the prompt realiztion of your military objectives.
4) Humanity: the protection of victims, human treatment- those whoa re beyond the scope of violence. Respected, protected0 and treated humanely