Winning_Against_War.pdf

Copyright © 2022 IIT Guwahati Model United Nations
PUBLISHED BY THE SECRETARIAT, IIT GUWAHATI MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2022
IITGMUN.ORG
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. You
may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License
at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0. Unless required by applicable law
or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an “AS IS” BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License
for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License.
First printing, March 2022

Contents
I Introduction
1 Letter from the Secretariat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2 Rules of Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Introductory Remarks 9
2.2 Secretariat 9
2.3 Agenda 10
2.4 Conduct of Business 10
2.5 Points 11
2.6 Motions 12
2.7 Resolutions 13
2.8 Suspension of the Rules 14
3 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
II Past
4 Aftermath of WW1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.1 Treaty of Versailles 19
4.2 Formation of League of Nations 19
5 Shortcomings Of League Of Nations & WW2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

6 Nuremberg Trials and Tokyo Trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7 Influence of Nuremberg Trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
III Present
8 Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
8.1 Geneva Convention 27
8.2 Regulation of methods of War 28
8.3 The Hague Convention of 1907 29
8.4 The Geneva Protocol 30
9 Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
9.1 Roman Statute 32
9.2 Internation Criminal Court 33
10 Amnesty for War Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
11 Non state bodies and insurgency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
11.1 The Taliban 39
11.2 ISIS 40
11.3 The Question 40
11.4 History of Counter-Actions And Resolutions 40
12 Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
12.1 Early Efforts and History 42
12.2 International Committee of the Red Cross 43
12.3 Role of the UN 43
12.4 Problems and the Future 43
IV Future
13 Cyber Warfare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
13.1 Building of Laws Governing Cyber War 47
14 Regulation of UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
V Case Studies
15 Vietnam War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
15.1 US Involvement 51
15.2 Started with Retaliation, Now a War 52

5
15.3 The My Lai massacre 52
15.4 Operation Speedy Express 52
15.5 Vietnamization 53
15.6 Vietnam War: Full Stop 53
15.7 Conviction of war criminals 53
16 The case of Darfur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
16.1 Sudan- A brief history 54
16.2 Origin of conflict: DARFUR and its past 54
16.3 Sudan Under Omar al-bashir: (beginning of the darkest phase) 55
16.4 Rival opponents 55
16.5 Crime Rate 56
16.6 International Response 56
16.7 Recent Developments 57

6
This page has intentionally been left blank

I
1 Letter from the Secretariat . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2 Rules of Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Introductory Remarks
2.2 Secretariat
2.3 Agenda
2.4 Conduct of Business
2.5 Points
2.6 Motions
2.7 Resolutions
2.8 Suspension of the Rules
3 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Introduction

1. Letter from the Secretariat
Dear Delegates,
Greetings to all, and a hearty welcome to the Fourteenth Edition of the IIT Guwahati Model
United Nations. The Secretariat is excited to host this event for you from the 11th to the 13th
of March 2022, packed with passionate debates and discussions amongst some of the brightest
political minds our country and the world have to offer.
This year, the conference is focused on various global problems and phenomena ranging from a
wide variety of topics and fields, ready for you to tackle and solve them for future generations to
come. Whether it’s about a centralized set of regulations and personal laws for all citizens of a
specific country or an issue that affects people and organizations all over the world in the wake of
the digital age, we hope to enlighten all participants about the ever-changing world and give them a
taste of how global leaders worldwide come together to resolve these issues.
Guiding you in this conference will be members of the Executive Board, selectively handpicked
by the Secretariat with tremendous knowledge about the topics at hand, backed by an impressive
experience in their past. They will be more than happy to help you on the course of this journey,
and we’re sure you’ll have a wonderful time along.
A conference like this is not an easy task to handle, even more so hosting it in the first place.
This has been a culmination of many months of work in planning, execution, and polishing. We
have a lot of surprises and exciting moments set in motion, ready for you, and we cannot wait to
provide you one of the most thrilling experiences of your life.
Happy researching!
The Secretariat
IIT Guwahati Model United Nations

2. Rules of Procedure
2.1 Introductory Remarks
Rule 1. Official and working languages
English shall be the official and working language of all committees during formal and
informal debate.
Rule 2. Decorum
Delegates are to obey instruction given by the IITG MUN staff. Those who do not obey
directions will be dismissed from the conference.
Rule 3. Dress Wear
The MUN is a formal event and it is expected that all the delegates are in western formal
attire. The only exception to this is if the delegate wishes to wear the traditional formal attire
of the nation he/she is representing.
2.2 Secretariat
Rule 4. Statements by the Secretariat
The Secretary-General or his/her representative may make oral as well as written statements
to any committee concerning any issue.
Rule 5. General Functions of the Secretariat
The Chairperson shall declare the opening and closing of each meeting and may propose the
adoption of any procedural motions to which there is no significant objection. The Chair,
subject to these rules, shall have complete control of the proceedings at any meeting and
shall moderate discussion, announce decisions, rule on points or motions, and ensure and
enforce the observance of these rules. The Chair may temporarily transfer his or her duties to
another member of the committee staff. All procedural matters in committee are subject to

10 Chapter 2. Rules of Procedure
the discretion of the Chair. The Chair may undertake any action that is not covered in the
Rules of Procedure in order to facilitate the flow of debate at the conference.
2.3 Agenda
Rule 6. Agenda
The Secretary-General or his/her representative shall communicate the agenda to the dele-
gates before the conference.
Rule 7. Revision of the Agenda
Additional items of an important and urgent nature may be placed on the agenda during a
regular session by the Secretary-General who may add additional topics to the agenda at
his/her discretion.
Rule 8. Change of the Agenda
In the event of a crisis or emergency, the Secretary-General or Director-General may call
upon a committee to table debate on the current topic area so that the more urgent matter may
be addressed. After a resolution has been addressed and voted upon, the committee will return
to debate the tabled topic. If a resolution on the crisis topic fails, the committee may return to
debate on tabled topic area only at the discretion of the Secretary-General or Director-General.
2.4 Conduct of Business
Rule 9. Speakers List
The Chair shall open the speakers list for each topic to be discussed at the request of a
delegate. Any delegate wishing to be added to the speakers list shall indicate so when asked
by the Chair or shall submit such a request in writing to the dais.
Rule 10. Limitation of Speaking Time
The Chair may limit the time allotted to each speaker. However, delegates can motion to
increase or decrease the speaking time, which will be voted upon by the committee or council.
When a delegate exceeds his or her allotted time, the Chair may call the speaker to order
without delay.
Rule 11. Speeches
No delegate may address the body without the previously obtained permission of the Chair.
The Chair may call a speaker to order if his/her remarks are not relevant to the subject under
discussion. The Chair shall enforce the time limit as described by Rule 9.
Rule 12. Yielding Time
The delegate, who has been recognized by the Chair to address the body on a substantive
issue, may yield any time following their remarks after their speech. Yields may be made in
three ways: to another delegate, to points of information (questions), or to the Chair.
• Yield to another delegate.
His/her remaining time shall be given to another delegate.
• Yield to questions.
Delegates shall be selected by the Chair to ask one question per speech. The Chair has
the right to call order to any delegate whose question is, in the opinion of the Chair, not

2.5 Points 11
designed to elicit information. Answers to questions are limited to the time remaining
in a delegate’s speech.
• Yield to the Chair.
Such a yield should be made if the delegate does not wish his/her speech to be subject
to comments. The Chair shall then move on to the next speaker.
Once a delegate yields his/her time, the second delegate (the one who has been yielded
to) may not yield any remaining time.
Rule 13. Right to Reply
The Chair may recognize the Right of Reply only in instances of a grave personal insult.
Rights of Reply must be submitted in writing to the Chair, and may only be granted after
a speech is completed. The Chair shall inform the Secretary-General of the circumstances
surrounding the Right of Reply. No ruling on this matter is subject to appeal.
Rule 14. Appeal to the Chair’s Decision
An appeal is made when a delegate feels that the Chair has made an incorrect ruling. The
delegate formally challenges the Chair in writing by sending a note to the dais, moving
to appeal the Chair’s decision. The appeal will be taken to the Deputy-Secretary General
who will decide if the appeal will be considered. Once the motion is acknowledged, the
Deputy-Secretary General will hear from both the delegate and the Chair before making a
decision.
2.5 Points
Rule 15. Point of Personal Privilege
During the discussion of any matter, a delegate may raise a Point of Personal Privilege, and
the Chair shall immediately address the point. A Point of Personal Privilege must refer to a
matter of personal comfort, safety and/or well-being of the members of the committee. The
Chair may refuse to recognize a Point of Personal Privilege if the delegate has not shown
proper restraint and decorum, or if the point is dilatory in nature.
Rule 16. Point of Order
During the discussion of any matter, a delegate may raise a Point of Order and the Chair shall
immediately consider the request. A Point of Order must relate to the observance of the rules
of the committee or to the way the Chair is exercising his or her power. A delegate raising a
Point of Order may not speak on the substance of the matter under discussion. The Chair
may refuse to recognize a Point of Order if the delegate has not shown proper restraint and
decorum governing the use of such a right, or if the point is dilatory in nature.
Rule 17. Point of Information (question to other delegates)
After a delegate gives a speech, and if the delegate yields their time to Points of Information,
one Point of Information (a question) can be raised by delegates from the floor. The speaker
will be allotted the remainder of his or her speaking time to address Points of Information.
Points of Information are directed to the speaker and allow other delegations to ask questions
in relation to speeches and resolutions.
Rule 18. Point of Inquiry
If there is no discussion on the floor, a delegate may raise a Point of Inquiry to request
clarification of the present procedural status of a meeting. A Point of Inquiry may never

interrupt a speaker.
2.6 Motions
Rule 19. Suspend Debate (Motion to Caucus)
Upon the recommendation of the Chair or any delegate, the committee may consider a motion
to Suspend Debate for the purpose of a moderated or un-moderated caucus. This motion
requires a majority vote.
• Moderated Caucus: The recommendation for a moderated caucus must include a time
limit for delegate remarks and a time limit for the entire caucus (e.g. "The nation of
[country name] moves for a five minute moderated caucus with a 30 second speaking
time."). During moderated caucus, the chair shall recognize delegates for remarks
without the use of a speakers list and yields shall be out of order.
• Un-moderated Caucus: The recommendation for an un-moderated caucus requires a
time limit to be made (e.g. "The nation of [country name] moves for a ten minute
un-moderated caucus."). Un-moderated caucuses allow delegates to have informal
discussions.
Rule 20. Motion to Table Debate
During the discussion of any matter, the committee may consider a motion to table debate on
the item under discussion at the recommendation of the Chair or any delegate. If the motion
is seconded, two representatives may speak in favor of and two against the motion. Then, the
motion shall immediately be put to a vote. A two-thirds majority is required for passage. If
a motion to table debate is passed, the topic is considered tabled and no further actions or
votes will be taken on it. A topic may be reintroduced to the committee so that debate can
resume through the same process. The motion to resume debate on a tabled topic shall also
require a two-thirds majority for passage.
Rule 21. Closure of Debate
A delegate may at any time move for the closure of debate on the item under discussion,
after which debate will end and all draft resolutions and amendments will be put to an
immediate vote. Permission to speak on the closure of debate shall be accorded only to
two speakers opposing the closure, after which the motion shall be immediately put to a
vote. This motion requires a two-thirds majority decision. Upon passage of this motion the
Chair shall declare the closure of debate and immediately move into voting procedure on the
substantive proposals introduced and pending before the committee. The committee shall
also close debate and move into voting procedure when the speakers list has been exhausted.
Rule 22. Adjournment of the Meeting
During the discussion of any matter, a delegate may move for the adjournment of the meeting.
Such a motion shall not be debated but shall be immediately put to a vote. After adjournment,
the committee shall reconvene at its next regularly scheduled meeting time; adjournment of
the final meeting shall adjourn the session.
Rule 23. Order of Procedural Motions
The motions below shall have precedence in the following order over all other proposals or
motions before the committee:
(a) Point of Personal Privilege

2.7 Resolutions 13
(b) Point of Order
(c) Point of Inquiry
(d) Point of Information
(e) Introduction of a Draft Resolution
(f) Motion to Suspend Debate
(g) Motion to Table Debate
(h) Motion for Closure of Debate
(i) Motion to Adjourn the Meeting
2.7 Resolutions
Rule 24. Submission of Working Papers, Draft Resolutions, and Amendments
Working papers, draft resolutions, and amendments shall be submitted to the Director with
the proper number of signatures. The Chair may permit discussion and consideration of
proposals and amendments once approved, even if the documents have not been circulated
through the committee.
Rule 25. Introducing Draft Resolutions
Once a draft resolution has been approved by the Director and has been copied and distributed,
a delegate may raise a motion to introduce the draft resolution, which is automatically ap-
proved and does not require a vote. The content of the introduction shall be limited to
summarizing the operative clauses of the draft resolution. Such an introduction shall be
considered procedural in nature, hence yields and comments are out of order. Additional
questions and comments regarding the resolution are. Delegations physically present in
the committee may not abstain on procedural motions. Decisions on draft resolutions and
amendments shall require a simple majority in favor. However, the passage of all resolutions
in the General Assembly requires two-thirds the present members, plus one, to vote in favor
of the draft resolution.
Rule 26. Amendments
Both friendly and unfriendly amendments require the approval of the Chair. An amendment
is considered friendly if all of the sponsors of the initial draft resolution are signatories of the
amendment. Such an amendment is adopted automatically. Unfriendly amendments are a
decision of the Committee. An unfriendly amendment must have the approval of the Direc-
tor and the signatures by 20% of the committee. Amendments to amendments are out of order.
Rule 27. Methods of Decision
All procedural decisions, except for the closure and adjournment of debate, shall be made by
a simple majority of the delegates present. Delegations physically present in the committee
may not abstain on procedural motions. Decisions on draft resolutions and amendments shall
require a simple majority in favor. However, the passage of all resolutions in the General
Assembly requires two-thirds the present members, plus one, to vote in favor of the draft
resolution.
Rule 28. Voting Rights
Each present delegation shall have one vote. Observing nations and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) cannot vote on substantive matters. Each vote may be a Yes, No, or
Abstain. On procedural motions, members may not abstain. Members “present and voting”
shall be defined as members casting an affirmative or negative vote (no abstentions) on all
substantive votes.

Rule 29. Conduct While in Voting Procedure
After the Chair has announced the beginning of voting, no representative may enter or leave
the room, nor shall any representative interrupt the voting except on a Point of Personal
Privilege, Point of Inquiry, or a Point of Order in connection with the actual conduct of the
voting. Communication between delegates is strictly forbidden. A member of the staff shall
secure the doors during voting procedure.
Rule 30. Method of Voting
Delegations may vote in favor of or against a proposal or may abstain from voting. The
committee shall normally vote by show of placards, but any delegate may request a roll call
vote on substantive matters. The roll call vote shall be taken in alphabetical order of the
English names of the countries present.
During a roll call vote, delegations may answer with an affirmative vote, a negative vote, an
abstention (when appropriate) or may pass. Delegations passing in the first round of voting
will be called upon alphabetically in a second round, at which time they may only answer
with an affirmative or negative vote. Delegations that appear to be voting out of policy, while
casting an affirmative or negative vote, may reserve the right to explain their vote by Voting
with Rights. Delegations must announce that they are Voting with Rights at the time they
cast their vote. The Chair may permit delegations Voting with Rights to explain their votes
after voting has concluded but before the decision has been announced.
Rule 31. Order of Draft Resolutions
If two or more draft resolutions relate to the same question, the committee shall vote on the
resolutions in the order in which they have been submitted.
Rule 32. Voting on Unfriendly Amendments
During the voting procedure on a substantive proposal, unfriendly amendments to a reso-
lution shall be voted on first. When two or more amendments are proposed to a resolution
concurrently, the committee shall first vote on the amendment that creates the greatest change
to the draft resolution, as deemed by the Chair, and then the amendment that creates the
second greatest change to the resolution. This process continues until all amendments are
voted upon. Where, however, the adoption of the amendment necessarily implies the rejection
of another amendment (as decided by the Chair), the latter amendment shall not be put to a
vote. If one or more amendments are adopted, the amended proposal shall then be voted upon.
Amendment voting is a substantive procedure and adoption requires the simple majority
consent of the delegates present.
Rule 33. Passage of Resolutions
If a vote does not result in a simple majority in favor, the resolution shall be regarded as
rejected. A simple majority requires fifty percent of the members present during the last roll
call, plus one. Example: 99 members present requires 49.5 (50%) + 1= 50.5=51 affirmative
votes.
2.8 Suspension of the Rules
Rule 34. Suspension of The Rules
These rules may only be suspended following a majority vote. Any motion to suspend the
rules is subject to the Chair’s discretion.

3. Introduction
From its initial structured definition of being "a serious breach of the law of war to force the
subjects of the enemy into service for the victorious government", the definition of a ’war crime’
has since become muddled in its transformations over the years. The first formal discussions on war
crimes were recorded to have occurred sometime around the end of the First World War, following
a convention held by the then victorious Allied powers. The Allies wished to prosecute close to
900 war criminals, a list of whom they sent to Germany. Naturally, however, few were tried and
even fewer convicted. The second major attempt to prosecute war criminals came after WWII
when the Allies looked to punish the atrocities committed by the Nazis under Adolf Hitler. The
Nürnberg trials were held, and after the trials, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, made genocide an
international crime that could be prosecuted in any country. Critics often described war crime trials
at the time as a form of "victor’s justice", as atrocities committed by the victors were always left to
slide.
The two world wars and their severity lead to the formation of the well known Geneva Conven-
tions, specifying certain prosecutable acts in both the internal and international scopes. However,
the first formal international prosecution of war crimes after the world wars came in ’93 to prevent
acts of ethnic cleansing in the conflict between the former Yugoslavia states and restore peace in
the Balkan region. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible
for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former
Yugoslavia was formed, commonly known as the ICTY. Charges of genocide in Rwanda were
responded with the creation of the ICTR by the UN, formally known as the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations
of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda. The ICTR and ICTY
could impose only terms of imprisonment, in contrast to the Nürnberg and Tokyo tribunals, which
were empowered to impose capital punishment. Another cog in the machine of trying war crimes
was the formation of the International Criminal Court by 150 countries in ’98. The court came into
existence in ’02 and had been ratified by around 120 countries by ’16- notably excluding Russia,
China, and The United States.

16 Chapter 3. Introduction
Even though the magnitude or severity of international war crimes during the world wars have
not been matched since, war, and by extension war crimes, are still very prominent and have
been occurring since. Despite being recognized as war crimes by many, deaths during the recent
Isreal-Gaza conflict fall into a grey area of no action or alarm. In the recent past, civil wars and
international conflicts have seen little to no prosecutions, and pointing fingers yields no results in
the haze of international politics. This, of course, is very troubling in the schema of the turbulent
future the world finds itself facing. Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs and his kill team’s allegations of
killing for sport in Afghanistan exemplifies a dangerous situation with confusing jurisdictions. The
question arises as to what the United Nations can do with its powers in international and internal
situations like these, and whether they have the strength to prosecute and take action at all. Are
modifications of existing conventions and rules the way to go, or is it time to overthrow it all and
start fresh? The world around us is seeing atrocities far too regularly for the United Nations to sit
silently, and the time has arrived to take action before the situation turns too grave and chaotic to
handle.

II
4 Aftermath of WW1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.1 Treaty of Versailles
4.2 Formation of League of Nations
5 Shortcomings Of League Of Nations & WW2
20
6 Nuremberg Trials and Tokyo Trials . . . . . 22
7 Influence of Nuremberg Trials . . . . . . . . 24
Past

4. Aftermath of WW1
WW1 was an international conflict that began on July 28, 1914, and ended on November 11,
1918. It was one of the deadliest conflicts in the history of mankind in which almost 9 million
people were killed in combat, while over 5 million civilians died to occupations, hunger, and
disease. This period witnessed a gruesome number of war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.
The 1919 Paris Peace Conference imposed a number of settlements on the defeated powers, the
best known being the Treaty of Versailles which resulted in the dissolution of Russian, German,
Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires and gave birth to newly independent states, including
Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia.
The Peace Conference established a Special Commission to assess the kaiser’s and other Ger-
man military and civil authorities’ culpability for the atrocities perpetrated by the Germans in the
region they controlled.According to reports, Belgian citizens were cruelly subjected to torture by
German soldiers during the first two months of the war. Imperial Germany also initiated the use of
poison gas as a weapon, which was later used by other major powers.
Other than Germany,the regime of Young Turk ordered the wholesale killing of Armenians
living within Western Armenia, in which over 1.5 million Armenians were killed. Assyrian civilians
were exterminated by the Ottoman Empire’s forces which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of
thousands. Along with it, Ottoman Empire also carried out a violent ethnic cleansing event against
Greeks in Anatolia in which they killed hundreds of thousands.
On August 19, 1915, Baralong Incident was a brutal act perpetrated by the United Kingdom
forces in which the survivors of the German submarine U-27 were massacred brutally by Lieutenant
Godfrey Herbert.
Later, Štip massacre took place in which the extermination of Serbian soldiers by the IMRO
paramilitaries in Ljuboten village in which 118-120 Serbian soldiers were killed occurred.
The first world war also saw the introduction of new weaponry to the globe of warfare. Tanks

4.1 Treaty of Versailles 19
and combat aviation were first utilized in the first global mechanized war, but it’s less commonly
remembered that the first practical flamethrowers were also deployed in WWI. However, they
were inefficient because they only utilized ignited gasoline, which would rapidly burn out and
cause minor harm. However, this weapon continued to develop. The accounts of usage of highly
dangerous weaponry, war crimes, genocides, and crimes against humanity led to the importance
and creation of a peace treaty and committees that can end this conflict and work as a deterrent for
future wars.
4.1 Treaty of Versailles
The Treaty of Versailles was the most important of the peace treaties that brought WW1 to an
end. It brought the war between Germany and the Allies to an end. It was signed in the Palace
of Versailles on June 28, 1919. the Palace of Versailles took six months of Allied negotiations at
the Paris Peace Conference to conclude the peace treaty. It was officiated by the Secretariat of the
League of Nations on October 21, 1919.
One of the most important and controversial provisions of this treaty was that it blamed Germany
and its allies for the entirety of the damage incurred by the Allied and Associated Governments.
The treaty compulsorily asked Germany to disarm itself, make enough territorial concessions, and
pay reparations to certain countries. The overall cost of these reparations was estimated to be 132
billion gold marks in 1921, which is nearly comparable to US$442 billion in 2022.
4.2 Formation of League of Nations
The League of Nations was formed at the Paris Peace Conference on January 10, 1920. It was
the first worldwide intergovernmental organization to prevent another global conflict like World
War I and maintain world peace. Preventing conflicts via collective security and disarmament and
resolving international disputes through diplomacy and arbitration were among the responsibilities
that the League accepted. They also included labor conditions, just treatment of native inhabitants,
human and drug trafficking, the arms trade, global health, prisoners of war, and protection of
minorities in Europe in their concerns. Even though the US President Woodrow Wilson was an
enthusiastic supporter of the League. The United States did not join the League of Nations formally.
This was due to a number of factors, the first of which being that America had suffered civilian
fatalities during the war, and many Americans wanted America to stay out of European issues.

5. Shortcomings Of League Of Nations & WW2
The League of Nations was created after the end of WW1 in 1920, with the objective of stopping
another large-scale war from occurring. However, it failed to do so, and WW2 broke out only two
decades later, in 1939. With already strained international relations between countries after WW1,
the conditions of unanimity for decisions taken and the need to make impartial judgments made it
very difficult for the League to take and enforce any decisions.
The US, which had emerged as a major superpower and was one of the primary architects of the
League, refused to join. Germany, Italy, and Japan also left the League, and the Soviet Union was
expelled. This made other countries very hesitant and, in some cases, led to outright refusal to join.
The League was an independent entity; although the opinion that it did favor the winners of
WW1 remains debatable, it was reliant on the armed forces of other countries to enforce its deci-
sions. However, WW1 had left all member states in a weakened financial condition. Even Britain
and France, the most influential members of the League, were not ready to provide personnel. Thus
the League was unable to stop significant wars like the Second Sino-Japanese War, the annexation
of Abyssinia by Italy, and the Spanish Civil War.
WW2 broke out in 1939 despite the best efforts of the League; however, it remains crucial as
the first instance of cooperation among countries on a global scale.
Both the Allied and the Axis powers committed numerous atrocities in the war. The crimes
committed by the Allies include the indiscriminate bombing of mainland Japan by the US, in-
cluding the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which led to the deaths of 300,000
to 900,000 people, most of which were civilians. Rapes, mutilations, and murders of tens of
thousands of women by the western allied forces, and numerous massacres like the Grischino mas-
sacres across Europe and the Asia Pacific, painted a horrifying picture of bloodshed and devastation.

21
The Axis powers were also not blameless. War crimes committed by Germany against Poland,
which includes but is not limited to the Wawer and Le Pardi’s massacres and the leveling of the city
of Warsaw, led to the deaths of thousands of people. The Nanking Massacre, a horrifying display
of human savagery by the Japanese in China, was responsible for the deaths of about 200,000 people.
Many such massacres, mass bombings, disease, starvation, and in some cases systematic
genocide were responsible for the deaths of approximately 50-55 million civilians, along with
reportedly 20-25 million military deaths and a loss of around 4 Trillion $. This made WW2 the
deadliest in human history and emphasized an immediate need for nations to cooperate for peaceful
coexistence., leading to the foundation of the present-day United Nations.

6. Nuremberg Trials and Tokyo Trials
The world witnessed a horrendous amount of brazen savagery during the years of world war two,
which developed a need for justice to be brought upon those who suffered at the hands of the
people responsible for it. The Leipzig War Crimes Trials convened at the end of World War 1 set
a precedent for trying those accused of war crimes, but it was primarily considered ineffectual
due to its limited scale. Years later, post world war two, the voices for trying Nazi Germany’s
leaders were much more echoed. The governments of the Soviet Union, United States, and the
United Kingdom came to a joint declaration in 1943 and published their "Declaration on German
Atrocities in Occupied Europe," which set out a warning that, when the Nazis were defeated, the
Allies would "pursue them to the uttermost ends of the earth, so that justice may be done."
After careful rumination in August 1945, the four major Allied powers signed the 1945 London
Agreement, which established the International Military Tribunal to be held in Nuremberg. The
prosecution of senior members of Nazi Germany’s political, military, judicial, and economic lead-
ership who planned, carried out, or otherwise participated in the Holocaust and other war crimes
was the highlight of the proceedings. Months after the Nuremberg proceedings, a military tribunal
named the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), often known as the Tokyo
Trial or the Tokyo War Atrocities Tribunal, was held in Japan to punish the leaders of the Japanese
Empire for crimes committed during World War 2. The decisions taken during these trials have
been considered a turning point in the history of international law.
The daunting task of trying Nazi officials was made a reality by classifying the crimes into three
categories, namely, crimes against Peace, War crimes, and crimes against humanity. The notion of
war crimes had already been entrenched by the Geneva conventions of 1864, but the crimes against
humanity and the crime of war of aggression or crimes against peace were criminal offenses born
in Nuremberg. In the purview of these offenses, twenty-two senior German political and military
leaders, including Hermann Goering, Rudolph Hess, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Alfred Rosenberg,

23
and Albert Speer, were indicted by the IMT. Unlike Nuremberg, the accusation of crimes against
peace was a requirement for prosecution in the IMTFE; the Tribunal could only prosecute those
whose offenses included crimes against peace.
From November 1945 through October 1946, history was being written in the courts of Nurem-
berg, which concluded with 19 defendants being found guilty and served sentences differing from
death by hanging to fifteen years in jail and declared three organizations to be criminal. On the
Eastern front, the 1,781-page lengthy judgment reached by the Tribunal was being divulged in
the courts during December of 1948. With the exception of Japanese Emperor Hirohito and other
members of the imperial family, all other defendants were sentenced to face penalties ranging from
death to seven years in jail.
For many, the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials denoted a first pragmatic solution for accountability
of war crimes, but to its adverse critics, it appeared to be a betrayal of the core principles of
justice under law. Despite the fact that the guilt of the individuals and parties sentenced remains
unquestioned, the tribunals’ foundation, jurisdiction, and functioning have received criticism for
its flaws. The most ardent disapproval was based on what is referred to as victor’s justice. It was
suggested that the Allied powers exercised hypocrisy and liberated themselves of any investigation
and prosecution for any war crimes committed by them. The willful omission of aerial bombing
from the London Charter as a war crime was considered Allied powers’ attempt to safeguard
themselves from being held accountable for American and British bombing of German cities.
London Charter had the onus of defining the crimes punishable under crimes-against-humanity and
crimes-against-peace retroactively, which can be said to be in violation of penal law’s principle
of restricting ex post facto laws. The defense challenged the charges’ legal qualification, arguing
that the acts committed were in accordance with the law of the time and place and the defendant’s
actions were a consequence of their obedience to the head of the state even if they went against
the general norms of morality. However, the Tribunal struck down this defense by claiming that
individual responsibility ranks higher than the order of superiors.
As iterated by a presiding judge William Webb and supported by several judges of IMFTE who
released their opinions outside of court, ’A Judgment may itself be historic, yet its contents may be
incomplete as history.’ There is no denying that the criticism of the tribunals for their unmentioned
Allied crimes, the unaddressed Japanese crimes, the un-indicted Japanese Emperor hold weight in
their feathers. However, with all their imperfections Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials tremendously
altered the face of international criminal law, effects of which can be observed even in the present
day.

7. Influence of Nuremberg Trials
Without any doubt, the verdicts of the Nuremberg trials changed the course of international law
for the better. The trials have been credited for imposing the principle that abstract entities do
not commit crimes against international law, but men, and punishing such individuals is how
international law can be enforced, even if that individual is head of the state. Soon after the creation
of the international military tribunal, the trials of secondary Nazi officials, industrialists, doctors,
and lawyers who abused their authority were carried out. These trials, known as the "Subsequent
Nuremberg Trials," were held before the US military courts instead of the IMT but under the
same roof of the Palace of Justice. The infamous Doctor’s Trial prosecuted the individuals who
experimented on the prison camp population. The tribunal also agreed on eleven principles that
have become the cornerstone of contemporary medical ethics.
The classification of the crimes proved to be a legal step forward that the United Nations would
later follow to develop jurisprudence in the matters of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and
aggression. Deriving from the Nuremberg principles and the concept of crimes against humanity,
the criminality of genocide was eventually enshrined two years later in the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of Genocide in 1948, which was until then unprecedented in the pages
of international law. The resolution also became a part of the now-well known Geneva conventions.
Later on, it served as a precedent for future trials, tribunals, and the wave it began eventually led to
the establishment of the international criminal court.
The onset of the cold war brought an untimely end to the prosecutions, but after 40 years of
international law taking the back seat, at the end of the cold war, the Nuremberg paragon picked up
the pace again. Following the shocking episodes of ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia as an
aftermath of its disintegration and the genocide in Rwanda, the UN Security Council faced pressure
to take action and put in place an international criminal tribunal on an ad hoc basis. In 1993, the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was set up and in the upcoming

25
year, the Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). It
generally mirrored the ICTFY’s overall outline but was more precise in stating that violations of
the norms of war would not be accepted even in a civil conflict.
Building on the inconveniences caused in the Nuremberg trials due to the differences in judicial
tactics between the German and American systems during the trials, the voices demanding for a
permanent international criminal court grew over this period. After 50 years of struggle, on 17 July
1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court established the International Criminal
Court (ICC), which after reaching the required number of signatory countries, went into force
in 2002. The ICC promises to carry forward the principles established in the Nuremberg trials,
abolish the amnesty that exists for human rights offenders, and steer in a more egalitarian and
compassionate society.

III
8 Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
8.1 Geneva Convention
8.2 Regulation of methods of War
8.3 The Hague Convention of 1907
8.4 The Geneva Protocol
9 Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
9.1 Roman Statute
9.2 Internation Criminal Court
10 Amnesty for War Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
11 Non state bodies and insurgency . . . . . 39
11.1 The Taliban
11.2 ISIS
11.3 The Question
11.4 History of Counter-Actions And Resolutions
12 Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
12.1 Early Efforts and History
12.2 International Committee of the Red Cross
12.3 Role of the UN
12.4 Problems and the Future
Present

8. Regulation
8.1 Geneva Convention
The severity of the devastation caused by the two world wars prompted the formation of the
well-known Geneva Conventions, which define certain crimes that can be tried nationally and
internationally. The Geneva Conventions are four treaties and three protocols, which have defined
legal standards limiting the brutality of war globally. The term “Geneva Convention” specifically
refers to the agreements made in 1949 post the second world war, which updated two of the 1929
treaties and added two more conventions. The Geneva Conventions concern combatants of war and
safeguard those not involved in combat, such as civilians and health workers, and those who are no
longer involved in combat, such as the wounded and prisoners of war. The four treaties of 1949
were ratified, entirely or with certain reservations, by 196 countries. 1
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces
in the Field. The First Geneva Convention protects on-field wounded and sick combatants of war
and represents the fourth updated version of the original Convention (first adopted in 1864, revised
in 1906, 1929, and finally 1949). It contains 64 articles that protect the wounded and sick and
on-ground medical units and religious personnel.2
Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members
of Armed Forces at Sea.The Second Geneva Convention protects shipwrecked military members at
sea during the war. This treaty was first adopted in 1949 and served as a successor of the Hague
Convention 1907. It contains 63 articles which, in addition to protecting wounded and shipwrecked
members, also protects hospital ships, rescue crafts, and medical and religious personnel performing
duties at sea.3
1https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_
NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=375
2https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/INTRO/365?OpenDocument
3https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjicl/vol1/iss1/6/

28 Chapter 8. Regulation
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War The Third Geneva Convention
protects prisoners of war and contains 143 articles, following an update to the 1929 treaty, which
had only 97 articles. The status of ‘Prisoner of war’ was broadened in accordance with Treaties I
and II and now includes more categories of people. The treatment of prisoners of war and their
conditions of captivity were precisely defined, specifically concerning the labour they are made to
do, the financial help and relief they receive, and the judicial proceedings instituted against them.
This Convention also states that prisoners of war should be released and repatriated without delay
once hostilities stop.4
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The Fourth Geneva
Convention was adopted on account of the experiences of World War II, which showed the catas-
trophic effects of the absence of a convention towards the protection of civilians during the war. It
consists of 159 articles and contains a short section on the general protection of civilians against the
consequences of war. The bulk of the Convention addresses the status and treatment of protected
persons and contains detailed information on humanitarian relief for civilians in occupied territory.5
Following the adoption of the Geneva Convention in 1949, the next two decades saw several
non-international conflicts and wars of national liberation. The former prompted a meeting on the
subject in 1977, which resulted in the approval of two protocols in addition to the four treaties.
These two protocols lay down solid guidelines for the protection of victims of international (Proto-
col I) and non-international (Protocol II) military conflicts. In 2005, a third protocol was adopted,
which declared an additional emblem, the Red Crystal, having the same status as the Red Cross and
Red Crescent emblems.
Finally, because the implementation of the Fourth Convention’s provisions is a major challenge for
international humanitarian law, the need for national legislation, the need to increase awareness of
the Fourth Convention’s provisions, and the need to strengthen mechanisms to monitor implemen-
tation and repress serious violations is being observed. Some critics argue that the Conventions
are approaching the age of retirement and that they are no longer appropriate for contemporary
warfare that conventional pit armies against armed groups, especially in an era when most battles
are fought within states rather than between them; proponents argue that the laws are still valid and
that the Conventions, along with their Additional Protocols, remain to provide the best available
framework for safeguarding civilians and non-combatants.
8.2 Regulation of methods of War
The Geneva Conventions of 1949 were primarily focused on protecting combatants of war and did
not address the issue of regulation of weapons used in war crimes. Instead, these were addressed by
the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, which looked to limit conventional armaments in wars.
Several articles in the Hague Conventions were adopted from the Lieber Code6, which was issued
in the United States during the American Civil War in 1863. The Code was regarded as one of the
best summaries of laws describing war regulations and played a huge part in defining the Hague
Conventions as the first multilateral treaties addressing war conduct.
6https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=
A25AA5871A04919BC12563CD002D65C5&action=OpenDocument

8.3 The Hague Convention of 1907 29
The Hague Convention of 1899:
The first Conference was convened upon a proposal by the Russian Tsar Nicholas II. His foreign
minister Count Muravyov suggested the following agendas of discussion,
1. Limitation on the expansion of armed forces and reduced use of new armaments.
2. Extending the treaties of the 1864 Geneva Conventions to include naval warfare.
3. Revision of the Brussels Declaration of 1874 regarding land warfare.
The 1899 conference failed in its primary objective to regulate war weaponry. However, it did
address several other issues in the form of three main treaties and three additional declarations.
The most important was the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, which
created the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Additionally, it adopted conventions that defined a state
of militancy and other customs regarding war on land7and sea8. The three declarations involved the
prohibition of discharge of explosives from balloons, prohibition of the use of asphyxiating gases9
and prohibition of the use of bullets that could expand or change their shape.
8.3 The Hague Convention of 1907
The second Hague conference was called upon request by U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt
and was attended by 44 states’ representatives. The 1907 Hague Convention involved only a few
advancements from the 1899 Convention. The main focus of this Convention was to modify some
parts of the earlier treaties to include aspects of naval warfare. The 1907 Convention consisted of
13 treaties and one additional declaration.
Once again, the proposal for the regulation of new war equipment was not accepted. However,
several other conventions were adopted at the Conference, including those on the use of force
to recover contract debts, the rights and responsibilities of neutral powers and war personnel on
land and sea, the legal position of enemy merchant ships10, naval bombardment in wartime11,
restrictions about the exercise of the Right of Capture in maritime war12, and the establishment of
an international prize court13. The additional declaration extended the 1899 declaration about the
discharge of explosives from balloons; however, the Conference did not renew mandates regarding
the use of poisonous gases and expanding bullets. Finally, the delegates in the 1907 conference
decided that a series of regular international meetings effectively dealt with new global problems
and set a date for the next Conference to happen eight years later, in 1915.
2B134D111958C73AC12563CD002D66C8&action=OpenDocument
B0625F804A9B2A64C12563CD002D66FF&action=OpenDocument
250D6DDD0DACDCD7C12563CD002D67CD&action=OpenDocument
F13F9FFC628FC33BC12563CD002D6819&action=OpenDocument
97E57C2489CF158CC12563CD002D6848&action=OpenDocument
ACAFD374A7CE79EAC12563CD002D68DB&action=OpenDocument

30 Chapter 8. Regulation
Despite the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 prohibiting the use of asphyxiating gases,
World War I saw a large-scale use of dangerous chemicals in warfare. The Battle of Gravenstafel is
a prime example where the Germans released chlorine gas in Ypres, Belgium, as a part of their
attack in 1915. This was the first-ever large-scale deployment of chemicals as weapons of war and
what followed was disastrous. The United States, Austria-Hungary, and Russia joined this chemical
arms race. Soon enough, dangerous chemicals affecting lungs, skin, and eyes were used as warfare
weapons. Lethal chemicals like hydrogen cyanide were used to fill grenades on the battlefield. The
dangers were not limited to the war combatants but to nearby civilian towns as winds blew these
poisonous gases miles away from the battlefield. Hundreds of thousands of civilians died due to
lung, skin, or cerebral damage from the chemical weapons used by both sides.
8.4 The Geneva Protocol
At the 1925 Geneva Conference, under the initiative of the United States, France, and Poland,
the member states drafted what is known as the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of
Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, commonly
called The Geneva Protocol 14. Many countries signed and approved the protocol in the years
leading up to World War II. On the other hand, the US did not formally ratify the protocol until
1975, even though it regarded itself as bound by it throughout wartime.
Since its inception, the limitations of the Geneva Protocol have become increasingly evident.
• At the time of signing, several significant powers such as the United Kingdom, France, Russia,
among others, reserved the right to use these restricted chemical weapons for retaliatory
purposes. Meaning, if another party used these chemical substances against them, the
obligations would cease to apply, and they would legally be permitted to respond in kind.
(The Shortcomings of Indeterminacy in Arms Control Regimes: The Case of The Biological
Weapons Convention by Jack M. Beard:: SSRN)15
• Although the protocol was widely accepted as a general prohibition towards the use of
chemical and biological weapons, it never mentioned anything about the production, storage,
and distribution of these weapons. This allowed powerful countries such as the United States
and the Soviet Union to produce and store large quantities of chemical/ biological agents
to use when needed. This issue, however, was later addressed when the Geneva Protocol
was supplemented by the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) of 1972 and the Chemical
Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1993.
The absence of a comprehensive or universal ban on nuclear weapons in international law has led
to scholars arguing that nuclear weapons are not per se illegal under the laws of war and customary
international law. In Shimoda v. State, the 1964 judgment by the Tokyo District court concluded
that the United States’ use of nuclear weapons in World War II breached the Hague Conventions
and customary international law by causing unjustified suffering.
In recent years, revived interest in the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons led to great
worry over the catastrophic humanitarian repercussions of any use of atomic weapons. It reiterated
14https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/INTRO/28
15https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2312699

8.4 The Geneva Protocol 31
the importance of all States adhering to international law, particularly international humanitarian
law, at all times. Following this, on July 7, 2017, the Conference on the Prohibition of Nuclear
Weapons adopted the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (by a vote of 122 States in
favour, with one vote against and one abstention) at the United Nations. The Secretary-General of
the United Nations opened it for signature on September 20, 2017. Following the deposit of the
50th instrument of ratification or accession of the Treaty with the Secretary-General on October 24,
2020, it went into force on January 22, 2021, in accordance with its article. However, this Treaty,
due to its provisions, fails to find much support from major countries, hence leading to hold-backs
in its implementation

9. Accountability
9.1 Roman Statute
The Rome Statute of International Criminal Court (often referred to as the International Criminal
Court Statute or the Rome Statute), adopted at the close of a diplomatic conference held in Rome
in June–July 1998 (formally the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on
the Establishment of an International Criminal Court), was signed into agreement by nearly 140
nations. Although the inception of devising a Statute for an international criminal court was as early
as 1948 when the UN General Assembly assigned the same to the International Law Commission;
three years after which the Commission submitted a draft proposal, consideration of the same was
postponed. In 1989, the UNGA invited the Commission to urgently recommence its work, which
became crucial, following the atrocities committed in Rwanda and former Yugoslavia and the
establishment of international criminal tribunals to prosecute individuals responsible for genocide
and ethnic cleansing in those countries. The Rome Statute ultimately came to force on July 1, 2002,
ratified by the requisite of 60 different countries. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC), negotiated by 160 and
signed by 140 nations, and defined the court’s structure, function, and jurisdiction. The ICC stems
from the two core principles of Nuremberg: the need for accountability for serious crimes and the
resolve to guarantee and enforce international justice. Today, 123 countries have ratified and are
party to the Statute.
The Rome Statute of the ICC established four core international crimes: war crimes, crimes
against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression. The Statute also nullifies the "statute
of limitations" on these crimes. As specified by the Rome Statute, the ICC can only investigate
and prosecute the above-mentioned international crimes in situations where states are "unable" or
"unwilling" to do so themselves, and it is also maintained that the jurisdiction of the court shall
be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. Only crimes committed in the territory of a
state party or by a national of a state party fall under the domain of the ICC, and the only exception
to the above rule is that the ICC may also exercise jurisdiction over crimes if it is referred to or
authorized jurisdiction by the United Nations Security Council.

The term war crime has always been challenging to define with precision, and the world has
witnessed an ever-evolving and broadening context of the term. Article 8[2̂] of the Rome Statute
lends the ICC jurisdiction over war crimes and lays down several detailed definitions of the same.
The Rome Statute specifies war crimes as grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of August 12,
1949, a few being: wistful killing; torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular
trial; Taking of hostages; Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy,
enforced sterilization or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the
Geneva Conventions; and more. The Statute also applies for cases of an armed conflict, not of
an international character, severe violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions
of August 12, 1949, and to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there
is a protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or
between such groups.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is needed to not only legally justify but
mandate the intervention of a legislative body in regions of war and armed conflict. States have
always been more willing to accept a role for international norms and standards during international,
or interstate, wars than during civil wars, but the Rome Statute holds party nations accountable for
disputes within their borders. Today, 123 nations stand signatories to the Rome Statute of 1989, but
the failure of the United States, Russia, China, and several other major countries to join the ICC
has gravely compromised its effectiveness.
9.2 Internation Criminal Court
Jurisdiction
The International Criminal court exercises Jurisdiction, as per Rome Statute Treaty, on the following
four crimes
1. Genocide
2. Crimes against Humanity
3. War crimes
4. Crime of Aggression
The court exercises jurisdiction on cases committed on or after 1 July 2002.As per the ICC, the
conditions for Jurisdiction are the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the
territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the Jurisdiction of the Court; or the crimes
were referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) under a
resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the UN charter. The security council refers to the Court in
case of an act of aggression as per chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, irrespective of the
involvement of state parties or nonstate parties; effective from 17 July 2018
Particular case for aggression
If UNSC doesn’t refer the aggression to the Court, then the Prosecutor can initiate its own investiga-
tion or request from the state party. In such a case, the Prosecutor shall notify the security council,
and if in the next six months no determination is made from the UNSC, then the Prosecutor may
proceed with the investigation, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commence-
ment of the investigation. The ICC acts as a complement to the national Jurisdiction of countries,
not a replacement.It has no self-enforcement body, and thus it relies on the cooperation of countries
worldwide for its various enforcing activities such as arrests, etc.

34 Chapter 9. Accountability
Various steps in Jurisdiction
1. Preliminary examination
2. Investigations
3. Pre-trial stage
4. Trial stage
5. Appeals stage
6. Enforcement of sentence
Jurisdiction type
Territorial Jurisdiction-:The territorial jurisdiction of the Court includes the territory, registered
vessels, and registered aircraft of states which have either (1) become party to the Rome Statute or
(2) accepted the Court’s jurisdiction by filing a declaration with the Court.
The personal Jurisdiction of the Court extends to all natural persons who commit crimes, re-
gardless of where they are located or where the crimes were committed, as long as those individuals
are nationals of either (1) states that are party to the Rome Statute or (2) states that have accepted
the Court’s Jurisdiction by filing a declaration with the Court. As with territorial Jurisdiction, the
personal Jurisdiction can be expanded by the Security Council if it refers a situation to the Court
Critical features of ICC as mentioned by the organization
1. It does not prosecute individuals below 18 years of age. Before investigation the Prosecutor
must conduct a pre-exam of the case like sufficient evidence, gravity, the interest of justice,
Complementary.
2. The defendant is innocent until proved otherwise. The burden of proof rests on the Prosecutor.
Both incriminating and exonerating evidence should be collected
3. As per sufficient evidence, the pre-trial judges issues warrant.
4. All the information of the proceeding should be provided to the defendant in the language
she understands. A case can be reopened again if new evidences emerge at a later date/time.
Legislation
The four core crimes on which ICC supervises-
1. Genocide
For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of
the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births
within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
2. Crimes against Humanity
Article 7 defines crimes against humanity as acts "committed as part of a widespread or
systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack". The
article lists 16 such as individual crimes some of which are murder;enslavement;Deportation
or forcible transfer of population;Enforced sterilization; sexual violence, etc.
3. War crimes
Article 8 defines war crimes depending on whether an armed conflict is either international
(which generally means it is fought between states) or non-international (which generally

means that it is fought between non-state actors, such as rebel groups, or between a state and
such non-state actors). In total there are 74 war crimes listed in article 8 There are 11 crimes
which constitute grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and which are applicable only to
international armed conflicts. To name a few, they are Wilful killing;Biological experiments
;Destruction and appropriation of property ; Compelling service in hostile forces; Denying a
fair trial ; Unlawful deportation and transfer, etc.
Along with these, there are seven crimes which constitute serious violations of article
3 common to the Geneva Conventions and which are applicable only to non-international
armed conflicts. They are listed as Murder; Mutilation; Cruel treatment ;Torture;Outrages
upon personal dignity; Taking hostages and Sentencing or execution without due process.
4. Crime of aggression
Crimes against aggression are defined as planning, initiating, or executing an act of aggres-
sion using state military force that violates the Charter of the United Nations. Following
actions can be said to violate the charter: Invasion or attack by armed forces against territory;
Military occupation of territory; Blockade of ports or coasts; Attack on the land, sea, or air
forces or marine and air fleets; The use of armed forces which are within the territory of
another state by agreement, but in contravention of the conditions of the agreement; Allowing
territory to be used by another state to perpetrate an act of aggression against a third state,
etc.
Tenure
President and first and second Vice President-: They are three judges of the Court who are elected
by their fellow judges for a maximum of two-three years tenure.
Judicial division-: It consists of 18 judges of the Court, divided into three chambers- Pre-trial, trial
and appeals chamber. Judges are elected by the assembly of state parties. They have a nine-year
term and are not generally eligible for re-election. They must be national of state parties, and no
two judges can be nationals of the same state party.
Office of the Prosecutor-: It is an independent office of the ICC responsible for conducting
investigations. A prosecutor has a nine-year tenure in office.
State parties
The state parties are states that have accepted the Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court.123 states are parties to the ICC as of November 2019. The state parties are obliged to coop-
erate with the ICC in any investigation and prosecution of crimes, including arrests and surrenders.
Part 9 of the Statute requires every state party to "ensure that there are procedures available
under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part"
State parties from various United Nations Regional Groups influence the minimum number of
judges in each group.
Paragraph 20(b) of the Procedure for the nomination and election of judges of the Court states that
any of the five regional groups would have a minimum of two judges in the Court. If, however, a
group has more than 16 states parties, then a third group will be allocated to that group.

36 Chapter 9. Accountability
Criticism and Opposition
The ICC depends not only on its state parties for executing its post-trial decisions but also on
pre-trials. This not only renders the process unproductive but it also makes it prejudiced. As a
result, member parties now have the opportunity to work in their own interests rather than following
the ICC’s directives. Another issue with such a system is the gathering of evidence/proof. The
participating parties are also given the opportunity to tweak proofs to their liking.
Critics often argue that the ICC has yet to dispel long-held fears that it will lead to politically
motivated cases and infringe on a state’s sovereignty – concerns that Secretary Pompeo recently
reaffirmed. Some critics believe the ICC is biased towards Africans, while others claim the court
"unfortunately reinforces Western attitudes and viewpoints as universal maxims true for all people
and all cultures, and re-enacts racialized metaphors of savages, victims, and saviours in the name of
truth and justice." Although there have been incidents of mentally and physically torturing captives
in Afghanistan, no Americans have been held guilty for war crimes to date. Great military powers
such as India and China refuse to participate in the Court because they see it as a danger to their
sovereignty.
Of course, the International Criminal Court (ICC) aspires to gain the required cooperation from
all relevant governments(including non-state parties when needed) during its legal investigations
and trials. The ability of nations to comply with the Court’s demands for cooperation should be
considered a major factor in its effectiveness.

10. Amnesty for War Crimes
Amnesty means "forgetfulness, oblivion; an intentional overlooking," or "the act of a sovereign
power officially granting pardon to people who have been convicted or are subject to trial but have
not yet been convicted." Criminal prosecution of those accused of committing war crimes is a
fundamental aspect of a victim’s right to justice. However, in armed conflicts where mass violations
of the laws of war have occurred, the concept of remedial or retributive justice for victims of war
crimes must often be balanced against the territorial state’s need to deal effectively and gradually
with past atrocities while avoiding the instigation of further violence. In these circumstances, a
restorative justice strategy with limited amnesties focused on the normative rather than the punitive
goals of criminal law may be the better proposition. Any legislative, constitutional, or executive
arrangement that exempts a chosen group of people, mainly military and government leaders, from
criminal punishment for crimes they committed in the past is known as an Amnesty law.
Amnesties for war crimes and other crimes of aggression mostly come into existence when States
are going through transitory periods of extreme political disturbance, often war to peace. Such
political sensitivity of a region calls for international law that enables the state to reconcile its
competing requirements for peace and democratic consolidation. With the development of an inter-
national criminal justice system over decades, a broad presumption of the immorality of amnesties
for foreign crimes has emerged, as it is debated to allow human rights violators to continue holding
power. Victims, their families, and human rights organizations, including Amnesty International,
Human Rights Watch, and the Humanitarian Law Project, have protested and litigated against
these laws, alleging that these violate local constitutional law and international law by maintaining
impunity. International law is increasingly seen as prohibiting amnesty for "international crimes,"
such as crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. For instance, post the Lebanese Civil
War (1975-1990), the Lebanese government adopted a general amnesty law on 26 August 1991.
According to official figures, 144,240 people perished in the war, 197,506 were injured, and 17,415
went missing. Despite this, these offenses have not been adequately addressed, nor have such
crimes been prosecuted. It is widely believed that the adoption of the Amnesty law is to blame for
the lack of accountability for the war crimes mentioned above.

38 Chapter 10. Amnesty for War Crimes
The complex issue of the legality of amnesties for war crimes under international law and the
related question of whether amnesty laws, agreements or practices may be given de jure or de facto
recognition by foreign or international courts is nearing a conclusion. Amnesties aimed to prevent
the prosecution of anyone suspected or convicted of war crimes are frequently included in state
legislation or constitutions, as well as treaties and political agreements. Amnesty for "international
crimes," such as crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide, is increasingly considered a
violation of international law. Other state practices, such as decisions not to exercise jurisdiction
and Security Council exemptions, may, nevertheless, preclude domestic or international courts from
adjudicating war crimes cases. Furthermore, specific rules of international law, such as immunity
for state authorities, may preclude trials for war crimes. However, the question often laced with
uncertainty usually lingers - Is it worth prolonging the conflict or control of the previous regime,
with the attendant rise in suffering and casualties, because the former regime refuses to relinquish
power?

11. Non state bodies and insurgency
Conflicts between nations have often resulted in full-scale armed conflicts and all-out wars. How-
ever, there has been a significant rise in the number of disputes that are not necessarily between
countries. Issues such as fundamentalism and ideological hard-lining have evolved. This mixture
with the growing want for political power amongst certain groups has led to armed conflicts and
dreadful situations themselves. Insurgency and militancy have served as the key ways to aid such
activities.
The CIA defines insurgency as ’a protracted political-military activity directed toward completely
or partially controlling the resources of a country through the use of irregular military forces and
illegal political organizations.’ Insurgency can be said to have three components, namely political
mobilization, guerilla warfare, and the use of terrorism.
The above is seen in several parts of the world. We can take the Taliban and ISIS as examples.
11.1 The Taliban
The origin of the Taliban dates back to the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet-backed regime in
Afghanistan and during the Afghani Civil War. Mujahideen fighters who later became the founders
and original leaders of the Taliban had fought against the Soviet-backed government. They were
a part of the war that brought about its fall in 1992. After the war, despite the power-sharing
agreement amongst Afghani leaders for peace and development, some local leaders and parties
did not participate, and things fell apart. Mullah Mohammad Omar, the first leader of the Taliban
and one of its co-founders, along with some students from his hometown, were unhappy because
Islamic law had not been installed correctly in the country. It was then that they formed the group.
They soon developed a following, and many students, mainly Afghani migrants in Pakistan, joined
them.
Over the several years, there have been allegations against several nations such as the US and

40 Chapter 11. Non state bodies and insurgency
Pakistan of having aided their formation. Through textbooks and education, the US taught Afghani
youth about militancy, weapons, and fighting to help the anti-Soviet insurgency. On the other hand,
Pakistan used its intelligence to support the Taliban in hopes of a new administration favorable to
Pakistan.
The Taliban carried out acts of terrorism and surprise attacks throughout Afghanistan to gain
control of the country and did so in 1996. They aimed to bring back law and order in the country
and establish an Islamic government based on a strict interpretation of Sharia law. Even during the
Taliban rule, Pakistan played a significant role in helping them.
11.2 ISIS
At times known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and as the Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria (ISIS), Islamic State is a militant Sunni Islamist group that has its presence mainly in the
regions in and around Iraq and Syria. They gained prominence in 2014 after their capture of major
Iraqi cities and also began the genocide against the Yazidis.
A primary goal of the IS has been to establish a Sunni Islamic State, a caliphate under the
Caliph- a supreme leader. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was appointed after they proclaimed a caliphate,
post their victories in June 2014. The IS detailed their plan in their magazine, Dabiq, to conquer
all land on Earth, targeting even the non-Muslim lands once the Muslim nations had been dealt with.
A journalist writing on Salafi jihadism, Jason Burke, has written that ISIL’s goal is to "terror-
ize, mobilize and polarize." The ISIL has kept its fighters allegiance by breaking them down and
instilling hate and vengeance in them for their enemies. They even carried out terrorist attacks in
western territories to motivate their fighters, like the Paris attack in 2015, and continue to carry out
international acts of terror to keep the fighters’ faith and distract them from the loss of territory in
more recent times.
11.3 The Question
Even though these are non-state parties, they have had a destabilizing effect in the regions in which
they affect. Loss of infrastructure, massive civilian deaths, constant fighting, and an outflow of
migrants to neighboring countries are only a few dire consequences of such situations, which are
similar to the by-products of a conflict between whole nations. What is it that the international
community can do to help? Is there any working body or authority which has jurisdiction to take
adequate steps to help and bring change? What steps can be taken to ensure that we are not left
helpless when the issue concerns non-state parties that are not a part of international organizations,
such as the UN itself?
11.4 History of Counter-Actions And Resolutions
Although these conflicts have not been entirely avoided or a solid solution found, efforts were made
to help time and again by the international community.

11.4 History of Counter-Actions And Resolutions 41
In the case of the Taliban, the UNSC passed resolution 1333 recognizing the humanitarian need of
the Afghan people and condemning the Taliban for the use of territory under them for the training
of terrorists and giving refuge to Osama Bin Laden. Several NGOs, along with the UN, helped the
people in the region by supplying the essentials like food and clothing, despite resistance faced by
the Taliban. When Pakistan was accused of providing support to the regime through its military
and intelligence, an arms embargo was placed by the UNSC, and officials explicitly singled out
Pakistan with the UN secretary-general criticizing them for their support of the Taliban.
After the September 11 attacks, the US, its NATO partners, and some other countries invaded. They
took various actions to curb the terrorism spawning out of the region. Although the UNSC did not
authorize this military action, it was seen as legitimate self-defense against the US Charter. The
Taliban finally retreated from Kabul in November 2001. Yet, for 20 years, the conflict kept going
on, with the Taliban trying to come back and the international community trying to negotiate a
peaceful solution to the issue. However, after the pulling-out of foreign troops and support to the
Afghan military in 2021, the nation fell to the Taliban in a matter of days. They regained control to
a heavy diplomatic protest from the other countries and the UN.
ISIS was heavily criticized by other nations and organizations such as the UN and human rights
groups. Even Islamic nations, leaders, and scholars have spoken against the ideology of ISIS and
that it does not have any place in Islam. Several countries, along with the UN and the European
Union, gave ISIL the status of a terrorist organization. A global coalition was formed led by the
US, known primarily as the Counter-ISIL Coalition, to support and carry out military operations,
address the humanitarian crisis, delegitimize the ISIL agenda, and cut off any aid being given to
them, whether in the form of finance or manpower. Other countries like Russia and Iran, who were
not a part of the coalition, also took on their own military actions for the situation.

12. Relief
Across borders and throughout history, the wake of war has often left gruesome and numerous
counts of civilian suffering, apart from military losses and casualties. On such occasions, individual
governments and international bodies have done the noble deed of standing up and aiding the
short-term recovery of countries and groups of people who faced significant loss due to war. The
United Nations’ first such aid was after the Second World War, during which time it helped rebuild
the recently devastated continent of Europe. 1
12.1 Early Efforts and History
After the two World Wars, The United States became the world’s biggest aid donor contributing
significantly to the rebuilding of Europe. Aid was also politicised in a sense, as the US and Russia
leveraged aid to encourage political allegiances in the wake of the Cold War.
Historians believe that the first defined country-wise commitments to help war afflicted nations
came in the 1960s. During this period, countries started to develop a target of giving out 0.7% of
national income as aid. Initially, countries like Britain and France would assist ex-colonies, perhaps
as a responsibility. On the contrary, countries like Sweden, which did not have colonies, were seen
to give out aid on a more humanitarian basis.
As the world shifted slowly to global capitalism, there has been an emergence of humanitarian aid
through wealthy philanthropists and individual organisations like banks. Country governments
continue to hand out relief, but just as was the case in history, assistance is often, naturally, given
out with a sense of mutual interests rather than from a moral standpoint.2
1https://www.un.org/en/our-work/deliver-humanitarian-aid
2https://reliefweb.int/report/world/history-foreign-aid

12.2 International Committee of the Red Cross 43
12.2 International Committee of the Red Cross
The International Committee of the Red Cross(IHRC) is one of the oldest and most honoured
institutions for humanitarian relief. The organisation is based in Geneva and has won the Nobel
Peace Prize thrice. State parties to the Geneva Convention have given the IHRC a mandate to
protect victims of armed conflicts throughout the globe. The ICRC operates on donations as a form
of funding and is majorly funded by The United States, Switzerland, and some major European
Countries. Historically, the ICRC has been very involved and critical in moments where post-war
relief has been required, with the organisation involved heavily in both the World Wars’ aftermaths.3
12.3 Role of the UN
Naturally, The United Nations- being an international body very involved in global peacekeeping-
comes into play when humanitarian relief is involved. The Office for the Coordination of Humani-
tarian Affairs (OCHA) comes under the UN Secretariat and considers itself one of the fastest and
most effective ways to support rapid humanitarian response. 4
A more recent and advisory body to the UN is the UN Peacebuilding Commission, set up in
’05 as a joint effort between the General Assembly and the Security Council. Rather than focusing
on monetary relief, the UN PBC hands its attention to advancing intergovernmental coherence in
the cases of cross-border and regional issues. 5
The UN consists of multiple other bodies as well dedicated to different areas of post-war re-
lief. One such body is the World Food Programme(est. ‘61), which has built itself up to be the
world’s largest humanitarian agency fighting global hunger and has been a crucial part of efforts
to feed the victims of war in the past6. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR) is another such agency of the UN; its primary focus is on refugees, displaced, stateless
and asylum-seeking people, providing emergency aid in the form of transport, food, water and
shelter7.
12.4 Problems and the Future
As was the case in the past, relief handed out from countries is never ’free’ in the truest sense
of the word. There are always numerous factors that come into play, most of which are political.
While war-based political affiliations came into play in the past, relief today is often met with
trading advantages and benefits, apart from political support. International organisations like those
mentioned earlier do help this matter slightly but often face issues due to their open-ended funding
structures. Humanitarian aid for civilians is also often met with corruption, power abuse and
political undertones, especially when provided in areas of active conflict.
Even when humanitarian aid is offered, in some cases, it is met with resistance or an inabil-
ity to reach its intended recipients through the form of interfering governments, corruption, and the
3https://www.icrc.org/en
4https://www.un.org/en/our-work/deliver-humanitarian-aid
5https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/repertoire/peacebuilding-commission
6https://www.wfp.org/
7https://www.unhcr.org/

44 Chapter 12. Relief
usage of aid as a political bargaining chip. Circumstances like these fall into the broad category of
"the denial of humanitarian assistance", a crime under international law according to the ICRC.8
While humanitarian aid is ideally a moral obligation of able countries to assist those in need,
the reality of global politics causes it to be tarnished by ulterior motives, corruption, and selfishness.
The question that follows is whether the world will ever be able to successfully monitor, straighten
out, and make the most out of humanitarian aid, and what role the UN can play in doing so?
8https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/article/other/57jq32.htm

IV
13 Cyber Warfare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
13.1 Building of Laws Governing Cyber War
14 Regulation of UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Future

13. Cyber Warfare
There is much debate regarding the definition of cyber warfare. However, according to Wikipedia,
"Cyberwarfare is the use of digital attacks against an enemy state, causing comparable harm to
actual warfare and disrupting the vital computer systems."1
While some believe that the term "cyber warfare" is a misnomer as no offensive cyber actions
till now could be described as a war, another view is that cyberattacks can be described as cyber
warfare as they cause much physical damage in the real world. Some experts also include the cyber
operations of non-state actors like terrorist groups and hacktivists as cyber warfare.
Despite the dilemma about the nomenclature and definition of such cyber-attacks, countries like
the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, Israel, Iran, and North Korea
are capable of offensive and defensive cyber operations as the countries keep exploring the use of
cyber operations, the chances of physical confrontation and violence increase.
While the basic idea of cyber warfare is to support traditional warfare, cyber warfare can also
include other threats like espionage, economic disruption, sabotage, and propaganda. Founder of
Kaspersky Lab, Eugene Kaspersky equates large-scale cyber weapons, like NetTraveller and Flame
by Kaspersky Labs, to biological weapons, claiming that in an interconnected world, they have the
potential to be equally destructive.2
Wars are slowly becoming knowledge-based as opposed to traditionally quantity-driven. This
process is aiding the fusion of old war skills with Artificial Intelligence technology which is driving
a new concept of war that is based on rapid and precise decisions, deployments, and destruction of
the enemy’s ability to fight rather than the more traditional concept of merely targeting the enemy
armament and arsenal. When AI is integrated with warfare, it automatically upgrades several
factors- logistics, maintenance, administration, training, and routine exercises. This, in turn, can
1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare
2https://www.coursehero.com/file/102290329/Cyberwarfaredocx/

13.1 Building of Laws Governing Cyber War 47
reduce workload and free up personnel. The military-AI ecosystem can design and deploy more
effective and efficient strategies and better operations control.
13.1 Building of Laws Governing Cyber War
There is some debate on whether we can apply the existing legal framework for warfare to cyber
warfare or new legislation is needed. The debate conflates on two separate issues- Can a legal
framework be applied to a cyberwar, and is the existing framework adequate. A review of the
applicability of the existing law of war suggests that if we approach cyber warfare as involving new
technology to gain military advantage, the current body of international law can be applied to cyber
conflict. However, some issues involving sovereignty, combatants, "force," or "overflight" may
need to be expanded or new definitions or rules.
Cyberwar in today’s world mainly involves espionage. Espionage is not an act of war; neither is
reconnaissance in preparation for later conflict considered as war.
With the internet facilitating anonymous communication, where a person’s identity and geo-
graphical location is tough to identify, coupled with the fact that there are no proper regulations
regarding cyber warfare, cyber warfare is continuously increasing and gaining more importance in
modern warfare.

14. Regulation of UAVs
Unlike conventional wars, future wars will remarkably rely on robots that can identify and attack
targets controlled by operators thousands of miles away from the battlefield. Some of them can
even function independently. Such developments are only the tip of the iceberg of future warfare.
Hence, the form of wars will be changed, which can form legal challenges and issues.
Even before World War II, the manufacturing of unmanned aircraft was developed. However,
the use of these aircraft increased exponentially post World War II period. Despite this, no specific
legislation has been defined internationally regarding the regulation of manufacturing and develop-
ing these aircraft.
According to the weapons law, these aircraft neither violate the principle of international law
nor threaten human rights. As a result, many countries do not see the usage of these aircraft as
illegal. However, according to experts, it is unlikely that these aircraft do not threaten peaceful
human life.More than 50 countries have developed thousands of unmanned aircraft.1 Even non-
governmental and private sectors use and benefit from unmanned aerial vehicles.
Now, it is time to ponder whether it is possible to consider unmanned combat aerial vehicles
as war armaments. The legitimacy of these aircraft based on Article 36 of the first protocol defined
in 1977 and the Geneva Conventions consisting of four treaties can also be questioned.
As per article 36 of the first protocol, every state is responsible for analyzing the legitimacy
of different forms of arms before using them. According to the weapons law, an unmanned combat
aerial vehicle does not violate the principle of avoiding any form of unnecessary, destructive, and
harmful effects. However, it does not mean that there are no challenges in using these aircraft on
battlefields.
Moreover, specific features also pose a threat to human lives. Some features such as flying
1https://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jpl/article/view/60044/0

49
at high altitudes, occasional technical glitches, and the inability to discriminate between military
and civilian targets efficiently, question the legitimacy of these aircraft. Quite a number of times, it
has been seen that while an operator can quickly identify a group of people, distinguishing between
military and non-military personnel is not always accurate. These have inevitable destructive effects
on non-military individuals.
Hence, we must question the legitimacy of these unmanned combat aerial vehicles and ponder
whether they should be regulated or not.

V
15 Vietnam War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
15.1 US Involvement
15.2 Started with Retaliation, Now a War
15.3 The My Lai massacre
15.4 Operation Speedy Express
15.5 Vietnamization
15.6 Vietnam War: Full Stop
15.7 Conviction of war criminals
16 The case of Darfur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
16.1 Sudan- A brief history
16.2 Origin of conflict: DARFUR and its past
16.3 Sudan Under Omar al-bashir: (beginning of the
darkest phase)
16.4 Rival opponents
16.5 Crime Rate
16.6 International Response
16.7 Recent Developments
Case Studies

15. Vietnam War
The domino theory of the Cold War states that if one country in a region came under communism,
the surrounding countries would follow in a domino effect. After World War II, France was
convinced if Vietnam were to become independent, it would have no choice but to fall under Soviet
influence. With the help of Americans, the French poured thousands of men into Vietnam, and Viet
Minh. On the other hand, a revolutionary organization created by Ho Chi Minh, was supplied by
the Soviets and the Chinese. They used guerrilla warfare tactics and hit-and-run strategies, which
gave them a significant upper hand in the battles. After the defeat of the French army in the Battle
of Dien Bien Phu, the Geneva Accord was signed. French troops withdrew, and Vietnam was
divided into North and South along the 17th parallel (17 degrees north latitude), separated by the
demilitarized zone. The South declared itself the Republic of Vietnam while the North remained
under the control of Ho Chi Minh’s communists with its government at Hanoi.
15.1 US Involvement
The lessons of the Second World War were on every policy-maker’s mind. So when the time
came for Vietnam’s spreading communism, the US couldn’t’t be seen doing nothing. They started
training South Vietnam’s military, doubling their funding and providing armored machinery. They
even authorized the use of Napalm and Agent Orange to deny cover to the Viet Cong and to destroy
the crops that fed them. During 1962 to 1971, in the infamous Operation Ranch Hand carried out
by U.S. Air Force, a mixture of herbicides called Agent Orange was aerially diffused in Vietnam for
the purpose of destroying the rural crop to deprive the guerillas of food and clearing out the sensitive
area around the base parameters. It is estimated that approximately 50 million liters of this defoliant
was sprayed over Vietnam which led to numerous side effects within the local population, such
as a stark increase in miscarriages, skin diseases, cancers, congenital disabilities, and congenital
malfunctions. The government of Vietnam accounts that around 4 million vietnamese citizens were
exposed to this chemical and as many as 3 million have suffered illnesses because of it. It is alleged
that even now, twenty-eight of the former U.S. military bases in Vietnam which were used to store

52 Chapter 15. Vietnam War
and supply it to the aircrafts still consist of high levels of dioxins in the soil, posing a health threat
to the surrounding communities. Even the US, Australian, and New Zealand servicemen who were
exposed to this chemical developed many skin cancers.Numerous war veterans have filed claims
that the ill health they experienced after returning home were due to the use of agent orange.
The US has been reported to use several other chemical warfare tactics. Their brutal use of
napalm for its tactical and psychological effects became an intrinsic element of their military action
in Vietnam.
15.2 Started with Retaliation, Now a War
The North was not really satisfied with this division. The Hanoi government formed the National
Liberation Front (NLF). However, the US and their allies called them Viet Cong, and branded them
as communist traitors to the nation. By 1966, more than 200,000 U.S. troops were stationed in
Vietnam. The war continued, and both sides were facing heavy casualties. The Viet Cong attacks
continued, but America couldn’t leave. They were too heavily invested, grounded in the belief that
a withdrawal would make them look weak. As the Pentagon papers later revealed, it was no longer
a fight against communism; it was to avoid humiliation.
15.3 The My Lai massacre
The My Lai massacre, also called the Pineville massacre, was one of the most gruesome war crimes
committed during the Vietnam war. It was a mass murder of about 500 unarmed civilians by the
US soldiers in the hamlet of My Lai on 16 March 1968. Many investigative journalists speculate
this was one of the few crimes that saw day’s light. Contrary to traditional warfare, where winning
the minds and hearts of the locals was a priority, US forces turned to mass killings to increase the
body count, which was their measure of success. US forces set out many plans to attack the Viet
Cong throughout the war but failed as they suffered many casualties due to mines and booby traps.
On 15 March, Captain Ernest Medina had directed US forces to plan for a direct attack at My Lai.
Assuming that the civilians had left, he ordered the troops to treat every living person in My Lai
to be a Viet Cong member or sympathizer. On 16 March 1968, as planned, the troops arrived and
civilians providing little to no resistance fell prey to the US forces as they carried out mass killings
of women, children, and the elderly. US forces also committed numerous rapes. By 11 AM, as
many as 500 Vietnamese civilians had been killed, and the US forces celebrated the victory with
little to no casualties.
15.4 Operation Speedy Express
Another example of the mass murders is the Operation Speedy Express, which was a controversial
operation conducted on the Mekong Delta provinces Kien Hoa and Vinh Binh. The US forces
carried it out to prevent the Viet Cong units from interfering with the pacification effort and to
interdict lines of NLF communication and deny them the use of base areas. This 6-month operation
led to the killings of about 10,889 enemies with only 40 casualties on the US side. There were

Winning_Against_War.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Winning_Against_War.pdf

Similar to Winning_Against_War.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (8)

Winning_Against_War.pdf