Understanding Arms Control and Laws of War

1. Arms Control and the Laws of War

2. Lesson Objectives •  Begin to understand the history of efforts to place limits on warfare. •  Understand the meaning of the concept of "Laws of War". •  Be able to describe the genesis of the current Law of War, particularly in the 20th century. •  Begin to understand the history of arms limitation as a tool for reducing the threat and impact of war.

3. World War I “The War to End All War”

4. Laws of War The Ultimate Oxymoron?

5. Laws of War Roots: • Religious texts and doctrine • Codes and rules of armies • Precedent • Reciprocity An attempt to bring order and restraint to chaos and brutality

6. Laws of War Modern Considerations: • UN charter • Geneva Conventions • Hague Conventions

7. Laws of War Two Distinct Strata Jus ad bellum (“law to war”) Jus in bello(“law in war”) Schaun Groves Just War Part 7: Jus Ad Bellum & Jus In Bello http://readshlog.blogspot.com/2005/10/just-war-part-7-jus-ad-bellum-jus-in.html

8. Laws of War Two Distinct Strata Jus ad bellum (“law to war”) • Deals with the reasons and justification for the use of force (for going “to” war) Traditional considerations: • Declared by a "legitimate" authority. • Initiated for a good (just) reason • Employed as a last resort Schaun Groves Just War Part 7: Jus Ad Bellum & Jus In Bello http://readshlog.blogspot.com/2005/10/just-war-part-7-jus-ad-bellum-jus-in.html

9. Laws of War Two Distinct Strata Jus ad bellum (“law to war”) • Deals with the reasons and justification for the use of force (for going “to” war) Jus in bello(“law in war”) • The real “Laws of War” • Deals with the conduct of war once joined Schaun Groves Just War Part 7: Jus Ad Bellum & Jus In Bello http://readshlog.blogspot.com/2005/10/just-war-part-7-jus-ad-bellum-jus-in.html

10. Laws of War Definition The laws of war (Jus in bello) define the conduct and responsibilities of belligerent nations, neutral nations and individuals engaged in warfare, in relation to each other and to protected persons, usually meaning civilians. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_War

11. Laws of War General Principles • Force should be use to restrain & restrict adversaries, not kill • Soldiers who surrendered should not be killed. • Non-combatants (unarmed civilians) should not be targeted • Indiscriminate (no specific target) force & weaponry prohibited • Unnecessary suffering prohibited. Schaun Groves Just War Part 7: Jus Ad Bellum & Jus In Bello http://readshlog.blogspot.com/2005/10/just-war-part-7-jus-ad-bellum-jus-in.html

12. Declaration of War • One of the criteria for a just (legal) war • Recognizes that a state of hostility exists • Usually declared by the national sovereign • Evokes a series of legal considerations • Relations with other (neutral) nations • Laws of War • International treaties

13. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Declaration of Paris (1856) • Maritime warfare (outlawed privateering) General Order No. 100 (Lieber’s Code – 1863) • Code of conduct for soldiers on the battlefield Geneva Convention (1864) • Condition of wounded on the battlefield Hague Convention (1899)

14. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Hague Convention (1899) • Hague I: Settlement of Pacific Disputes • Hague II: Laws & Customs of War on Land • Hague III: Adopted to Land Warfare Principles of Geneva Convention of 1864 (Treatment of Wounded) • Hague IV: Prohibiting Launching of Projectiles and Explosives From Balloons

15. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Hague Convention (1907) • Hague I: Pacific Settlement of Disputes • Hague II: Limitation of Employment of Force for Recovery of Contract Debts • Hague III: Opening of Hostilities • Hague IV: Laws and Customs of War on Land • Hague V: Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land • Hague VI: Status of Enemy Merchant Ships at the Outbreak of Hostilities

16. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Hague Convention (1907) (continued) • Hague VII: Conversion of Merchant Ships into War Ships • Hague VIII: Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines • Hague IX: Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War Hague X: Adaptation to Maritime War of the Principles of the Geneva Convention • Hague XI: Restrictions With Regard to the Exercise of the Right of Capture in Naval War • Hague XII: International Prize Court • Hague XIII: Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War

17. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Kellogg – Briand Pact (1928) • Renounced war as an instrument of national policy • Negotiated between • Fran B. Kellogg – US Secretary of State • Aristide Briand – French Foreign Minister • Ultimately 62 nations signed the agreement • Failed in goal of preventing war • First Violation: Japan in Manchuria (1931) • Served as basis for concept of crime against peace • Nuremburg Trails (1945-1949) • Still in force

18. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Geneva Convention (1928) • Prohibit Use of Gas and Biological Methods of War Geneva Convention (1929) • Treatment of Prisoners of War Geneva Convention (1949) • I: Care of Sick and Wounded in the Field • II: Care of Sick, Wounded and Shipwreck at Sea • III: Treatment of Prisoners of War • IV: Protection of Civilians in War

19. Treaties & Protocols Precedents for the Laws of War Geneva Convention (1975) • Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction

20. Arms Limitation Can be considered almost a separate branch of the Laws of War Attempts to limit or ban entirely certain weapons

21. First Arms Limitation? Crossbow By 11th & 12th centuries, crossbows could penetrate armor of knights. Threaten to upset the balance of power: • Semi-skilled peasants could anonymously kill gentlemen

22. First Arms Limitation? Crossbow Banned by Pope Innocent II for use in killing Christians. • Second Lateran Council 1139

23. First Arms Limitation Second Lateran Council Canon 29 “We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on.” Pope Innocent II EWTN: The Global Catholic Network http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/LATERAN2.HTM

24. Arms Limitation Interest in arms limitation increased as war has become come mechanized and weapons more deadly and expensive

25. Arms Limitation Early Attempt St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 “ … an International Military Commission having assembled at St. Petersburg in order to examine into the expediency of forbidding the use of certain in times of war between civilized nations, … the undersigned are authorized by the orders of their Governments to declare as follows: Considering that the progress of civilization should have the effect of alleviating as much as possible the calamities of war: That the only legitimate object which States should endeavour to accomplish during war is to weaken the military forces of the enemy; That for this purpose it is sufficient to disable the greatest possible number of men; That this object would be exceeded by the employment of arms which uselessly aggravate the sufferings of disabled men, or render their death inevitable; That the employment of such arms would, therefore, be contrary to the laws of humanity; “

26. Arms Limitation Early Attempt St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 “ … an International Military Commission having assembled at St. Petersburg in order to examine into the expediency of forbidding the use of certain in times of war between civilized nations, … the undersigned are authorized by the orders of their Governments to declare as follows: Considering that the progress of civilization should have the effect of alleviating as much as possible the calamities of war: That the only legitimate object which States should endeavour to accomplish during war is to weaken the military forces of the enemy; That for this purpose it is sufficient to disable the greatest possible number of men; That this object would be exceeded by the employment of arms which uselessly aggravate the sufferings of disabled men, or render their death inevitable; That the employment of such arms would, therefore, be contrary to the laws of humanity; “

27. Arms Limitation Early Attempt St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 “The Contracting Parties engage mutually to renounce, in case of war among themselves, the employment by their military or naval troops of any projectile of a weight below 400 grammes, which is either explosive or charged with fulminating or inflammable substances. “ Intent: Ban the use of fragmentation, explosive, or incendiary small arms ammunition. (Wikipedia) Signatories: Austria-Hungary, Bavaria, Belgium, Denmark, France, the United Kingdom, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, the North German Confederation (i.e., Greater Prussia), Russia, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey (i.e.,the Ottoman Empire), and Württemberg. U.S. not a signatory. Only binding during war between signatories.

28. Arms Limitation Modern Controversy Just because you are not a signatory, should you still abide by a humanitarian arms limitation treaty?

29. Arms Limitation Modern Controversy Weapon: .50 cal McMillan Tactical Sniper Rifle http://www.eme421.com/50calmac.html Bullet: Raufoss Round http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raufoss_Mk_211

30. Arms Limitation Modern Controversy Video: Canadian Snipers Afghanistan Video

31. Arms Limitation Washington Naval Treaty (1922) • Response to post WW I naval building programs • Limited tonnage, armament on capital ships and aircraft carriers • Five major naval powers • US, Britain, Japan, France, Italy

32. Arms Limitation Washington Naval Treaty (1922) Limits on capital ships • US: 525,000 tons • Britain: 525,000 tons • Japan: 315,000 tons • France: 175,000 tons • Italy: 175,000 tons No capital ship could exceed 35,000 tons Armament Limitation: 16-inch guns maximum Ratio 5 : 5 : 3 : 1.7 :1.7

33. Arms Limitation Washington Naval Treaty (1922) Limits on aircraft carriers • US: 135,000 tons • Britain: 135,000 tons • Japan: 81,000 tons • France: 60,000 tons • Italy: 60,000 tons Each nation could have two carriers up to 33,000 tons; remaining carriers limited to 27,000 tons each. Armament Limitations: 8-inch guns (max of 8 per ship)

34. Arms Limitation Washington Naval Treaty (1922) Other Limits: • All other ships limited to • 10,000 tons each (no limit on total tonnage) • 8-inch guns or less

35. Arms Limitation Washington Naval Treaty (1922) Impact of Treaty: • Navies modified existing capital ships • Unusual designs evolved (treaty battleships, treaty cruisers) to remain within tonnage restrictions • US built no battleships 1918-1937 • US concentrated on cruisers, aircraft carriers

36. Treaty Battleships HMS Nelson Displacement: 33,950 tons Main Armament: nine 16-inch guns Post-Treaty: USS North Carolina Displacement: 35,000 tons Main Armament: nine 16-inch guns

37. Treaty Cruisers USS Northampton CA-26 Displacement: 9,000 tons Main Armament: nine 8-inch guns Post-Treaty: USS Baltimore CA-68 WW II cruiser: more secondary armament Displacement: 15,500 tons

38. Battle Cruisers USS Lexington CC-1 Displacement: 43,500 tons Main Armament: eight 16-inch guns

39. Aircraft Carriers USS Lexington CV-2 Displacement: 33,000 tons Note: 8 in. guns USN photo http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-l/cv2.htm 1929

40. Aircraft Carriers USS Lexington CV-2 Note: 5 in. guns Oct 1941 USN photo http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-l/cv2.htm

41. Aircraft Carriers USS Lexington CV-2 Displacement: 35,000 tons (wartime) USS Essex CV-9 Displacement: 27,100 tons

42. Significance of Treaties : it still happened Little impact on World War II • No use of poison gas

43. End