QOTD: Jonathan Keiler
Interesting article by Jonathan Keiler, The End of Proportionality.
Accusations of "disproportion," ..., will almost certainly be applied to American forces when domestic and international opposition to US actions can find no other complaint. Yet it is apparent that proportionality is not a useful yardstick for determining appropriate levels of force. The principle of proportionality is so vague and difficult to apply with any consistency, and so widely misunderstood, that the US military should discard it. Instead, American authorities should simply take the position that US doctrine proscribes use of force that is indiscriminate, wasteful, excessive, or not necessary to achieving military objectives. America's armed forces should openly acknowledge that they do not abide by the principle of proportionality because it is so problematic.
Taking that position would not be a violation of existing law, as neither the Hague Conventions nor the 1949 Geneva Conventions specifically refer to "proportionality." The United States is not a signatory to the 1977 Geneva Protocols, which do use the term (at least in the commentary). With respect to customary international law or traditional just war theory, simply declining to define American military action as "proportionate" would not violate the spirit of law or theory. Because the prescriptions of each are not specific in a statutory sense, the recommended doctrinal stance should suffice. Proportionality as a law of war concept for good reason has had limited applicability and usefulness during the last century. It deserves to be disposed of entirely.
No comments:
Post a Comment