 |
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
|
 |
On this point there is resounding agreement among our experts: Any
response must adhere to the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations,
and all the other laws and customs of war. The most fundamental
rule is that civilians and civilian buildings are immune from military
attack and must not be targeted. Belligerents must at all times
distinguish between military and civilian sites and direct their
attacks only against the former. Military necessity must be balanced
against the principle of proportionality, which dictates
that all precautions be taken to minimize collateral damage
(i.e., civilian casualties). You cannot fight terror with
terror, one of our experts emphasized.
The difficulty in this case is that terrorists by definition do
not wear uniforms, and deliberately protect themselves by blending
in with the civilian population. All our experts are concerned that,
in this scenario, the risk of collateral damage is high.
|
|
|