Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-09T04:17:24.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Unequal before the Law: The Case for the Elimination of the Distinction between International and Non-international Armed Conflicts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2007

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This article examines the possibility of creating a law of armed conflict that could be uniformly applied to both international and non-international armed conflict. The article looks at the history of modern armed conflict, and charts the progression of warfare from a predominantly interstate event to that which is more likely to be characterized as non-international or internal. The increasing prevalence of non-international armed conflicts throughout the twentieth century has lead to ongoing moves on behalf of the international community to bring the regulation of such conflicts further within the ambit of international regulation. With this in mind, the article argues that such moves have blurred the historical distinction between types of armed conflict to the point where the distinction could be eliminated altogether. By looking at international treaties, tribunals, and state practice, this article asserts that the law of armed conflict could be uniformly applied, with the aim of ensuring that all participants in armed conflict are equally and humanely treated.

Type
HAGUE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
Copyright
© 2007 Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law