Skip to content

Tag Archives: International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)

Transatlantic Dialogue on Int’l Law and Armed Conflict: Ken Watkin on the IHL/IHRL Interface

By
Friday, September 5, 2014 at 6:59 PM

The next installment in the series of posts derived from this summer’s Transatlantic Dialogue on International Law and Armed Conflict is now live at the ICRC’s Intercross blog. It is from Ken Watkin, and it concerns the overlap of IHL and IHRL. A taste: It is possible to address the perennial debate about the relationship . . .
Read more »

Transatlantic Dialogue on International Law and Armed Conflict: When Does LOAC Cease to Apply?

By
Wednesday, September 3, 2014 at 11:17 PM

As Dapo Akande of Oxford and Tracey Begley of the ICRC explain here and here, the next few weeks will see a series of short pieces posted here at Lawfare, at EJIL:Talk! (the blog of the European Journal of International Law), and at Intercross (the blog of the ICRC) giving readers a flavor of the . . .
Read more »

The AUMF and IHL’s Field of Application

By
Wednesday, April 9, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Our friends at the ICRC DC delegation have a wonderful blog, intercross, and often use it to host brief exchanges among scholars and practitioners on current IHL and IHL-related issues. Right now, they’re digging into questions about IHL’s applicability in connection with the 2001 AUMF (e.g., whether passage of the AUMF automatically brought IHL to . . .
Read more »

“Drones Are the Future for Dull or Dangerous Missions”

By
Wednesday, October 9, 2013 at 7:00 PM

The splendidly quotable title quote – “Clearly, drones are the future for dull or dangerous missions” – comes from Dan Jangblad , chief strategy officer for Sweden’s aerospace company, Saab AB, by way of an article in today’s Wall Street Journal (David Pearson, October 9, 2013, B6, likely behind paywall), “Europe’s  Elusive Drone Push.”  The article . . .
Read more »

Constitution Project Report on Detainee Treatment Concludes U.S. Engaged in Torture

By
Tuesday, April 16, 2013 at 1:15 PM

The Constitution Project has released the results of its Task Force on Detainee Treatment in the form of this 577-page report—which concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that “the nation’s highest officials bear some responsibility for allowing and contributing to the spread of torture.” Here . . .
Read more »

The ICRC Intercross Blog Series on the Typology of Conflicts

By
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 at 1:06 PM

“Intercross,” the blog page of the International Committee of the Red Cross, is currently running a series of posts with leading ICRC lawyers and guest commentators on the complex and often vexed question of the legal typology of armed conflict.  The head of the ICRC legal department, Knut Doermann, introduced the whole series, followed by . . .
Read more »

Yeah, But How Does the Taliban Feel About Those Hunger Strikes at Gitmo?

By
Wednesday, March 6, 2013 at 6:30 AM

The other day, Steve wrote a post noting a letter from habeas counsel at Guantanamo to the effect that “all but a few” detainees are currently on hunger strike to protest searches and confiscations and alleged abuses of the Quran. I know exactly what you thought when you read this post: I wonder what the Taliban . . .
Read more »

The Capture-or-Kill Debate #8: Kevin Heller Joins the Conversation

By
Monday, March 4, 2013 at 10:01 PM

The following guest post is the latest in a series comprising a debate as to whether LOAC requires an attempt to capture rather than a first-resort to lethal force in some circumstances.  The debate up to this point involved Professor Ryan Goodman, on one hand, and Professors Geoff Corn, Laurie Blank, Chris Jenks, and Eric Jensen . . .
Read more »

Ryan Goodman on The Power to Kill or Capture Enemy Combatants

By
Monday, February 11, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Ryan Goodman has a timely and important new article, forthcoming in EJIL, entitled The Power to Kill or Capture Enemy Combatants.  The Introduction to the piece (footnotes omitted) should draw many readers to the body of the argument: During wartime a critical legal question involves the scope of authority to choose whether to kill or . . .
Read more »

Motions Hearing in the 9/11 Case: 1/29 Session

By
Tuesday, January 29, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Your correspondent returns to Fort Meade’s Smallwood Hall, for Lawfare’s CCTV coverage of a second day of hearings in United States v. Mohammed et. al.  The day’s motions are different, but our format remains the same: you’ll find regular posts on our Events Coverage page, and links to those posts below, in this post—which will remain . . .
Read more »

Reminder: Hearings in the 9/11 Case Tomorrow

By
Sunday, January 27, 2013 at 5:29 PM

Ben’s analysis of Charlie Savage’s article on the Chief Prosector prompts this reminder: tomorrow at 9 a.m., Lawfare returns to Smallwood Hall for closed-circuit, piped-in-from-GTMO hearings in the 9/11 case.   There are twenty-five items set for oral argument during this week’s four-day session. Obviously, that’s waaay too many to digest in a single preview post.  Instead . . .
Read more »

The ICRC and Slate: An Exchange on Weapons

By
Wednesday, December 5, 2012 at 7:34 AM

The ICRC, on its blog Intercross, has responded to a pair of recent articles in Slate on weapons. It’s an interesting exchange—well worth a look. First, Slate ran this piece by Brad Allenby and Carolyn Mattick entitled, “Why We Need New ‘Rules of War': Individually Addressing New Technologies Like Drones Isn’t Enough. We Need to Rewrite the Rule Book.” It . . .
Read more »

Completion of Copenhagen Process Principles and Guidelines on Detainees in International Military Operations

By
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Belatedly, I want to note the completion — on October 18/19 — of the “Copenhagen Process on the Handling of Detainees in International Military Operations” and the release of “The Copenhagen Process Principles and Guidelines.”  The Copenhagen Process was a five-year, multi-stakeholder effort to develop principles and good practices for states and international organizations that . . .
Read more »

Which Will Come Out First: The Law of War Manual Revision or the ICRC’s New GC/AP Commentaries?

By
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Given the track record of the Law of War revision project, smart money probably has to be on the ICRC, even with a 2015 estimate for the first volume in their new series (see here).  Of course, both projects might well need to take account of one another’s end result, making the question of who publishes first all . . .
Read more »

Heller Responds to My Post on Syria and LOAC

By
Monday, July 16, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Kevin Heller writes in with the following observation in response to my post yesterday on Syria/LOAC: I liked your post on Syria and the ICRC, but this statement gave me pause: “The ICRC’s past and present approach to Syria, as noted above, emphasizes the notion that LOAC/IHL comes online only in relation to specific geographic . . .
Read more »

The War in Syria and LOAC: Some Key Issues

By
Sunday, July 15, 2012 at 4:42 PM

[Update: a responsive post from ICRC’s Daniel Cahen is here, and ones from Kevin Heller and Gabor Rona are here and here] Many papers and sites are today highlighting the fact that the ICRC has stated publicly that circumstances in Syria in general (as opposed to a few localized hotspots) constitute armed conflict, subject to LOAC/IHL. . . .
Read more »

Is DPH the Relevant Standard in Pakistan? An Important Element in the Debate Missing from BIJ’s Report

By
Monday, February 6, 2012 at 5:08 PM

[Note: a reader responded that I missed the point that an important point about the underlying BIJ report, one that puts the “A Question of Legality” component of the report in a different light. Specifically, the reader emphasizes that the underlying report acknowledges that there routinely are fighters intermixed with civilian rescuers in the rescue scenarios at . . .
Read more »

ICRC Report on Visits to U.S. Detention Facilities

By
Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 10:56 AM

The ICRC recently published this report on its visits to detainees being held in U.S. facilities in Afghanistan, Guantanamo, Iraq, and South Carolina. The report opens: Although terrorism is not new, States continue to be confronted with the question of how to respond adequately and effectively to the security challenges it poses while protecting the . . .
Read more »

The ICRC Has Launched a Blog

By
Monday, September 26, 2011 at 11:37 AM

And a rather snazzy-looking one at that. It’s called Intercross and its first post, by Simon Schorno, says it is about “the plight of children, women and men affected by armed conflict and armed violence. Intercross is about humanitarian action. It is about the work the ICRC and international humanitarian law and the rich history of . . .
Read more »

Peter Margulies on Koh on the WPR (at the Naval War College Last Week)

By
Tuesday, June 28, 2011 at 10:17 AM

The following is a guest post from Peter Margulies (Roger Williams Law), reporting highlights from the Naval War College’s International Law Conference 2011 (“Non-International Armed Conflict in the 21st Century”).  Note in particular the exchange relating to whether U.S. Command of NATO implicates the WPR via section 8(c), and whether the language of section 8(b) . . .
Read more »