Ten years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2011, Rethinking the Law of Armed Conflict in an Age of Terrorism, edited by Christopher Ford and Amichai Cohen, brings together a range of interdisciplinary experts to examine the problematic encounter between international law and challenges presented by conflicts between developed states and non-state actors, such as international terrorist groups. Through examinations of the counter-terrorist experiences of the United States, Israel, and Colombia--coupled with legal and historical analyses of trends in international humanitarian law--the authors place post-9/11 practice in the context of the international legal community's broader struggle over the substantive content of international rules constraining state behavior in irregular wars and explore trends in the development of these rules. From the beginning of international efforts to rewrite the laws of armed conflict in the 1970s, the legal rules to govern irregular conflicts of the "state-on-nonstate" variety have been contested terrain. Particularly in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, policymakers, lawyers, and scholars have debated the merits, relevance, and applicability of what are said to be competing "war" and "law enforcement" paradigms of legal constraint--and even the degree to which international law can be said to apply to counter-terrorist conflicts at all. Ford & Cohen's volume puts such debates in historical and analytical context, and offers readers an insight into where the law has been headed in the fraught years since September 2001. The contributors provide the reader with differing perspectives upon these questions, but together their analyses make clear that law-governed restraint remains a cardinal value in counter-terrorist war, even as the law stands revealed as being much more contested and indeterminate than many accounts would have it. Rethinking the Law of Armed Conflict in an Age of Terrorism provides an important conceptual framework through which to view the development of the law as the policy and legal communities move into the second decade of the "global war on terrorism."

Explores the normative foundation of international humanitarian law by developing and defending a new theory of military necessity.

This volume of Political and Military Sociology focuses on the perceptions and identities of those serving in the military, using survey or interview data to explore those perceptions. A range of military forces are examined, including those of the United States, Israel, Norway, and Denmark.The first article, using survey data from Denmark, compares the views of Danish soldiers to civilians. The second article looks at the effects of military education upon the attitudes and values of soldiers. The third article explores Israeli soldiers' attitudes regarding formal military education. The fourth article addresses the impact of Norwegian soldiers' self-identity on military performance.In a different vein, the survey results of the fifth article show that support for soldiers on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan does not necessarily translate into support for veterans. Military lawyers in the Israel Defense Forces are the subject of the sixth article. This volume concludes with an article that argues that military service should be offered as a legal policy alternative to incarceration.

This book explores the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) phenomenon – its impact and implications for Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as well as the inextricable linkage between its anti-Israeli/anti-Zionist propaganda and antisemitism, unraveled from yet unknown perspectives. The edited volume offers groundbreaking research: While Israeli public diplomacy focused on security, Palestinian diplomacy focused on a fabricated history. The book analyzes the old Russian anti-Zionist propaganda and its application by the BDS. The public space of BDS activity projects a humane façade, yet the covert part harbors antisemitic and violent supporters including terror groups and Iran. Western universities turned into incubators of pro-Palestinian groups that portray Israel as the source of evil. The academic boycott of Israel worked to isolate and stigmatize Jewish scholars in America because of a presumed Jewish occupation of the American academe. Western "liberals" wish to build bridges with the Muslim world, unable to overcome differences on democracy, secularism, women’s rights, etc., they focus on what they agree: animosity towards Israel. So has the UN; the ICC; Bedouin advocacy; and Human Rights Watch. The chapters in this book were originally published as a special issue of the journal Israel Affairs.

This book, a collection of essays in honor of Stuart Cohen, examines a variety of issues in civil-military relations (CMR) in Israel and abroad. Beyond honoring Cohen’s work, this collection makes a substantial contribution to the field for a number of reasons. First, it brings together prominent scholars from different disciplines in the field, from both Israel and abroad, sketching its boundaries. The chapters in the collection deal with a variety of issues, theoretical and empirical, including topics that are usually neglected in English works, such as the control the military in Israel has on building construction permits in the civilian sector and the relations between the security establishment and the judicial system. Other chapters offer new theoretical perspectives such as the context within which Israeli CMR should be examined, and a more general look at the focus of CMR. Second, it gives non-Hebrew speaking scholars and laypersons alike a better idea of what the main issues in the field of civil-military relations in Israel are today. This book will allow university professors and laypersons to access quality scholarship while still offering a broad spectrum of topics.

The high civilian death toll in modern, protracted conflicts such as those in Syria or Iraq indicate the limits of international law in offering protections to civilians at risk. A recent conference of states convened by the International Committee of the Red Cross referred to 'an institutional vacuum in the area of international humanitarian law implementation'. Yet both international humanitarian law and the law of human rights establish a series of rights intended to protect civilians. But which law or laws apply in a particular situation, and what are the obstacles to their implementation? How can the law offer greater protections to civilians caught up in new methods of warfare, such as drone strikes, or targeted by new forms of military organisation, such as transnational armed groups? Can the implementation gap be filled by the growing use of human rights courts to remedy violations of the laws of armed conflict, or are new instruments or mechanisms of civilian legal protection needed? This volume brings together contributions from leading academic authorities and legal practitioners on the situation of civilians in the grey zone between human rights and the laws of war. The chapters in Part 1 address key contested or boundary issues in defining the rights of civilians or non-combatants in today's conflicts. Those in Part 2 examine remedies and current mechanisms for redress both at the international and national level, and those in Part 3 assess prospects for the development of new mechanisms for addressing violations. As military intervention to protect civilians remains contested, this volume looks at the potential for developing alternative approaches to the protection of civilians and their rights.

For some time, the word 'crisis' has been dominating international political discourse. But this is nothing new. Crisis has always been part of the discipline of international law. History indeed shows that international law has developed through reacting to previous experiences of crisis, reflecting an agreement on what it takes to avoid their repetition. However, human society evolves and challenges existing rules, structures, and agreements. International law is confronted with questions as to the suitability of the existing legal framework for new stages of development. Ulrich and Ziemele here bring together an expert group of scholars to address the question of how international law confronts crises today in terms of legal thought, rule-making, and rule-application. The editors have characterized international law and crisis discourse as one of a dialectical nature, and have grouped the articles contained in the volume under four main themes: security, immunities, sustainable development, and philosophical perspectives. Each theme pertains to an area of international law which at the present moment in time is subject to notable challenges and confrontations from developments in human society. The surprising general conclusion which emerges is that, by and large, the international legal system contains concepts, principles, rules, mechanisms and formats for addressing the various developments that may prima facie seem to challenge these very same elements of the system. Their use, however, requires informed policy decisions.

In European Judicial Responses to Security Council Resolutions: A Consequentialist Assessment, Kushtrim Istrefi examines the multiple effects of European courts decisions as regards Security Council targeted sanctions and security detentions interfering with fundamental rights. He elaborates what type of judicial responses ensured real and practical respect for human rights for the petitioners, encouraged Security Council due process reform, clarified Security Council authorisations on security detentions, and tested the primacy and universal character of the UN Charter. Making use of legal and non-legal instruments, Istrefi sheds some light upon what happened to, among others, petitioners, the SC due process reform agenda, and the UN Charter after such cases as Kadi, Al-Jedda, Ahmed, Al-Dulimi.

This volume is a monumental collection of definitions, conceptual frameworks, paradigmatic formulations, and bibliographic sources, which is now being revised and updated as a resource for the expanding community of researchers on the subject of terrorism.

Since the "surge" in Iraq in 2006, counterinsurgency effectively became America's dominant approach for fighting wars. Yet many of the major controversies and debates surrounding counterinsurgency have turned not on military questions but on legal ones: Who can the military attack with drones? Is the occupation of Iraq legitimate? What tradeoffs should the military make between self-protection and civilian casualties? What is the right framework for negotiating with the Taliban? How can we build the rule of law in Afghanistan? The Counterinsurgent's Constitution tackles this wide range of legal issues from the vantage point of counterinsurgency strategy. Ganesh Sitaraman explains why law matters in counterinsurgency: how it operates on the ground and how law and counterinsurgency strategy can be better integrated. Counterinsurgency, Sitaraman notes, focuses on winning over the population, providing essential services, building political and legal institutions, and fostering economic development. So, unlike in conventional war, where law places humanitarian restraints on combat, law and counterinsurgency are well aligned and reinforce one another. Indeed, following the law and building the rule of law is not just the right thing to do, it is strategically beneficial. Moreover, reconciliation with enemies can both help to end the conflict and preserve the possibility of justice for war crimes. Following the rule of law is an important element of success. The first book on law and counterinsurgency strategy, The Counterinsurgent's Constitution seamlessly integrates law and military strategy to illuminate some of the most pressing issues in warfare and the transition from war to peace. Its lessons also apply to conflicts in Libya and other hot-spots in the Middle East.