 |
APV
Rogers, OBE Author, Law
on the Battlefield, Fellow, Lauterpacht Research Centre
for International Law, University of Cambridge |
 |
Eyal
Benvenisti
Professor of International Law, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Visiting Professor, Columbia Law School |
 |
Michael
Matheson
Senior Fellow
U.S. Institute of Peace |
 |
H.
Wayne Elliott, S.J.D.
Lt. Col. (Ret.) U.S. Army Former Chief, International Law Division;
Judge Advocates General School, U.S. Army |
 |
Robert
Kogod Goldman
Professor, Washington College of Law
American University |
 |
Steven
R. Ratner
Albert Sidney Burleson Professor in Law University of Texas
Law School |
 |
David
Turns, LL.M (London), Barrister
Lecturer in Law
The Liverpool Law School |
 |
Marc
Cogen
Professor of International Law, Ghent University |
 |
Surya
Narayan Sinha, Former UN
Legal Adviser in Kosovo, Zagreb, and for UN Relief and Works
Agency for Palestine Refugees, International Lawyer based in
Chennai, India. |
 |
|
|
September
21, 2001
|
 |
International law no longer speaks in terms of wars,
but of armed conflicts. These are usually understood
to be between States, although internal conflicts of exceptional
intensity may also be included. The present scenario is complicated
because the attacks were not directly carried out by a State, giving
rise to some provocative gray areas and points of disagreement.
APV Rogers notes that the law has been moving slowly towards
recognizing dissident armed factions and authorities representing
liberation movements as quasi-states. According to David Turns,
There seems little doubt that [these events] will pose a challenge
to the future development of the legal definition of armed
conflict and the specific rules applicable in such conflicts.
H. Wayne Elliott disagrees: Im not so sure. There is
evidence that bin Laden, even if not a head of State, acted with
the sanction of a State. If so, what we have here is a conflict
between two States.
|
|
|