With 'displacement' as the guiding thread, the purpose of this study is twofold. Firstly, it derives from the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law a legal framework for the protection of displaced persons in armed conflict, both from and during displacement. It contains a case study on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the recent Advisory Opinion on the Separation Wall, and addresses such issues as humanitarian assistance for displaced persons, the treatment of refugees in the hands of a party to a conflict and the militarisation of refugee camps. Secondly, it examines the issue of displacement within the broader context of civilian war victims and identifies and addresses the normative gaps of international humanitarian law, including the inadequacy of concepts such as 'protected persons' and the persistence of the dichotomy between international and non-international armed conflicts, which is at odds with the realities of contemporary armed conflicts.

This book critically examines the response of the United Nations (UN) to the problem of sexual exploitation in UN Peace Support Operations. It assesses the Secretary-General's Bulletin on Special Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (2003) (SGB) and its definition of sexual exploitation, which includes sexual relationships and prostitution. With reference to people affected by the policy (using the example of Bosnian women and UN peacekeepers), and taking account of both radical and 'sex positive' feminist perspectives, the book finds that the inclusion of consensual sexual relationships and prostitution in the definition of sexual exploitation is not tenable. The book argues that the SGB is overprotective, relies on negative gender and imperial stereotypes, and is out of step with international human rights norms and gender equality. It concludes that the SGB must be revised in consultation with those affected by it, namely local women and peacekeepers, and must fully respect their human rights and freedoms, particularly the right to privacy and sexuality rights.

The Leuven Manual is the authoritative, comprehensive overview of the rules that are to be followed in peace operations conducted by the United Nations, the European Union, NATO, the African Union and other organisations, with detailed commentary on best practice in relation to those rules. Topics covered include human rights, humanitarian law, gender aspects, the use of force and detention by peacekeepers, the protection of civilians, and the relevance of the laws of the host State. The international group of expert authors includes leading academics, together with military officers and policy officials with practical experience in contemporary peace operations, supported in an individual capacity by input from experts working for the UN, the African Union, NATO, and the International Committee of the Red Cross. This volume is intended to be of assistance to states and international organisations involved in the planning and conduct of peace operations, and practitioners and academia.

After having ignored victims, only recently both domestic and international law have begun to pay attention to them. As a consequence, different international norms related to victims have progressively been introduced. These are norms generally characterized by a certain concept from the perspective of victims, as well as by the enumeration of a list of rights to which they are entitle to; rights upon which the international statute of victims is built. In reverse, these catalogues of rights are the states' obligations. Most of these rights are already existent in the international law of human rights. Consequently, they are not new but consolidated rights. Others are strictly linked to victims, concerning the following categories: victims of crime, victims of abuse of power, victims of gross violations of international human rights law, victims of serious violations of international humanitarian law, victims of enforced disappearance, victims of violations of international criminal law and victims of terrorism.
"

Georg Nolte Excellencies, dear Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen, I welcome you to our colloquium on the occasion of the sixtieth an- versary of the International Law Commission. The Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich and the Humboldt University of Berlin are happy that you have followed our invitation. We are particularly proud that a majority of the members of the Int- national Law Commission have accepted our invitation. The presence of one former member of the Commission deserves special mention: Bruno Simma is now not only a Judge at the International Court of J- tice but also, if I may say so, the "local hero," having held the wond- ful Chair for International Law at the University of Munich for more than thirty years. He is still living in Munich when he is not in The Hague. We are glad that participants have come from nearby, from neighbouring regions and countries, as well as from countries as far away as Brazil and China. I am personally very content that our group represents a fine mixture of experienced international lawyers and younger colleagues and students. This composition gives us the opp- tunity for fruitful exchanges, and for the ILC to reach out and to - ceive feedback. The International Law Commission needs no introduction. Like a few happy persons, at age sixty it can look back onto a largely successful - reer.

This book provides an original legal analysis of child soldiers recruited into armed groups or forces committing mass atrocities and/or genocide as the victims of the genocidal forcible transfer of children. Legal argument is made regarding the lack of criminal culpability of such child soldier 'recruits' for conflict-related international crimes and the inapplicability of currently recommended judicial and non-judicial accountability mechanisms in such cases. The book challenges various anthropological accounts of child soldiers' alleged 'tactical agency' to resist committing atrocity as members of armed groups or forces committing mass atrocity and/or genocide. Also provided are original interpretations of relevant international law including an interpretation of the Rome Statute age-based exclusion from prosecution of persons who were under 18 at the time of perpetrating the crime as substantive law setting an international standard for the humane treatment of child soldiers.

The defining moments of 2001, the terrorist attacks of September 11 against the UnitedStatesofAmerica, markedaturningpointininternational lawandrelations. Bytheirscaleandaudaciousness, overnighttheyhelpedtopropeltheissueofint- national terrorism to the top of the international security agenda and particularly that of the USA, with consequences for many branches of international law, including the jus ad bellum, the jus in bello, international law relating to terrorism, international human rights law and international criminal law, that were just beginning to be felt as the year closed. The September 11 attacks were immediately characterised by the United States 3 as an act of war, an armed attack on such ascale asto constitute an armed conflict. Its immediate response was to declare a so-called 'Global War on Terrorism'. Avowedly acting in self-defense, on 7 October the US launched armed attacks against Afghanistan, notbecause Afghanistan wasconsidered tobelegally resp- sible for the September 11 attacks but for harbouring and refusing to surrender members of Al Qaeda, including its leader, Osama Bin Laden, and refusing to dismantle terrorist training camps. Although the main target of the attacks was Al Qaeda, the armed conflict that ensued was an international armed conflict between the US and its allies and the state of Afghanistan, notwithstanding that the US never recognised the Taleban as the government of Afghanistan.

This collection of essays by Professor Michael N. Schmitt of Durham University draws together those of his articles published over the past two decades that have explored particular fault lines in the law of armed conflict. As such, they examine the complex interplay between warfare and law, seeking to identify where the law and warfare appear to diverge, and where such apparent divergence can be accommodated through contextual interpretation of the law. Each essay examines a particular issue in either the jus ad bellum (the law governing resort to force) or jus in bello (international humanitarian law) that has proven contentious in terms of applying extant norms to the evolving face of armed conflict. Among the topics addressed are counter-terrorism, cyber operations, asymmetrical warfare, assassination, environmental warfare and the participation of civilians in hostilities.

What should be the role of our institutions of higher education? To promote good moral character? To bring an end to racism, sexism, economic oppression, and other social ills? To foster diversity and democracy and produce responsible citizens? In Save the World On Your Own Time, Stanley Fish argues that, however laudable these goals might be, there is but one proper role for the academe in society: to advance bodies of knowledge and to equip students for doing the same. When teachers offer themselves as moralists, political activists, or agents of social change rather than as credentialed experts in a particular subject and the methods used to analyze it, they abdicate their true purpose. And yet professors now routinely bring their political views into the classroom and seek to influence the political views of their students. Those who do this will often invoke academic freedom, but Fish suggests that academic freedom, correctly understood, is the freedom to do the academic job, not the freedom to do any job that the professor so chooses. Fish insists that a professor's only obligation is "to present the material in the syllabus and introduce students to state-of-the-art methods of analysis. Not to practice politics, but to study it; not to proselytize for or against religious doctrines, but to describe them; not to affirm or condemn Intelligent Design, but to explain what it is and analyze its appeal." Given that hot-button issues such as Holocaust denial, free speech, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are regularly debated in classrooms across the nation, Save the World On Your Own Time is certain to spark fresh debate-and to incense both liberals and conservatives alike-about the true purpose of higher education in America. "A vigorous defense of that abstemious understanding of the teacher's task, laced with numerous examples of its egregious violation." -First Things "Exhilarating, the thought polished and white-hot, this book makes the reader think and often wince, especially teachers like me who have aged out of the intellectual into the easy and congenial. A close reading of Save the World should purge much nonsense from classrooms." -Sam Pickering, author of Letters to a Teacher

The outsourcing of military and security services is the object of intense legal debate. States employ private military and security companies (PMSCs) to perform functions previously exercised by regular armed forces. International organizations, non-governmental organizations, and business corporations are increasingly doing the same to provide security, particularly in crisis situations. Much of the public attention on PMSCs has been in response to incidents in which PMSC employees have been accused of violating international humanitarian law. Therefore initiatives have been launched to introduce uniform international standards amidst what is currently very uneven national regulation. This book analyzes and discusses the interplay between international, European, and domestic regulatory measures in the field of PMSCs. It presents a comprehensive assessment of the existing domestic legislation in EU Member States and relevant Third States, and it identifies implications for future international regulation. The book also addresses the crucial questions of whether and how the EU can potentially play a more active future role in the regulation of PMSCs to ensure compliance with human rights and international humanitarian law. (Series: Studies in International Law - Vol. 38)

This book examines the history of declaring war from the early modern era up to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. In the late middle ages, formal declarations of war were highly ritualistic acts, but by the early seventeenth century, they had changed into a practice whereby an ambassador presented a printed declaration to an enemy king. Key issues covered here include determining how and when the medieval practices of declaring war gave way to the more modern ones, and the extent to which American framers accepted or rejected the practices of their era. While the debate over recent congressional resolutions authorizing use of the armed forces overseas has generated many publications, the wider history of declaring war has been far less a topic of study, and the early modern era has been all but ignored. This book's primary sources include ambassadorial reports, especially those from Venetian ambassadors, declarations of war, published works by noted contemporary thinkers, and several early modern literary works that depict the high drama of declaring war.

This book explores in what ways both sides involved in the so-called war on terror are using schoolchildren as propaganda tools while putting the children's security at grave risk. The book explores how terrorists use attacks on education to attempt to destabilize the government while the government and the international aid community use increases in school attendance as an ostensible index of largely illusory progress in the overall security situation and in development. The book challenges the notion that unoccupied civilian schools are not entitled under the law of armed conflict to a high standard of protection which prohibits their use for military purposes. Also examined are the potential violations of international law that can occur when government and education aid workers encourage and facilitate school attendance, as they do, in areas within conflict-affected states such as Afghanistan where security for education is inadequate and the risk of terror attacks on education high.

Since the end of the last century, UN peacekeeping has undergone a fundamental and largely unexamined change. Peacekeeping operations, long expected to use force only in self-defence and to act impartially, are now increasingly relied upon by the Security Council as a means to maintain and restore security within a country. The operations are established under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and some are empowered to use 'all necessary measures', language traditionally reserved for enforcement operations. Through a close examination of these twenty-first century peacekeeping operations - including operations in Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire, Haiti and the Darfur region of the Sudan - the book shows that they are, for the most part, fundamentally ill-suited to the enforcement-type tasks being asked of them. The operations, which are under-funded, under-equipped and whose troops are under-trained, frequently lurch from crisis to crisis. There is scant evidence, some 10 years on, that matters are likely to improve. The book argues that bestowing enforcement-type functions on a peacekeeping operation is misconceived. Such operations are likely to be unsuccessful in their enforcement-type tasks, thereby causing serious damage to the excellent reputation of UN peacekeeping, and the UN more broadly. In addition, because such operations are more likely to be perceived as partial, their ability to carry out traditional (non-forceful) peacekeeping tasks may be impeded. Finally, the Security Council's practice of charging peacekeeping operations with enforcement functions lessens the pressure on the Council to work to establish genuine enforcement operations - ie, operations that are considerably better suited to restoring peace and security. '...Dr Sloan is able to show, in knowledgeable detail, not only what has changed over the years, but also what has brought these changes about. His analysis leads him to offer not only well-informed insights, but critical observations, too...This book is a pleasing combination of detailed scrutiny of topics already familiar (provisional measures, consent, so-called 'Chapter VI1/2' action, implied powers) and a rigorous questioning as to their place in - or indeed, relevance at all to - militarised peacekeeping. The reader will find much new terrain traversed, and plenty of out-of-the-box thinking.' From the foreword by Dame Rosalyn Higgins

This unique new work of reference traces the origins of the modern laws of warfare from the earliest times to the present day. Relying on written records from as far back as 2400 BCE, and using sources ranging from the Bible to Security Council Resolutions, the author pieces together the history of a subject which is almost as old as civilisation itself. The author shows that as long as humanity has been waging wars it has also been trying to find ways of legitimising different forms of combatants and ascribing rules to them, protecting civilians who are either inadvertently or intentionally caught up between them, and controlling the use of particular classes of weapons that may be used in times of conflict. Thus it is that this work is divided into three substantial parts: Volume 1 on the laws affecting combatants and captives; Volume 2 on civilians; and Volume 3 on the law of arms control. This second book on civilians examines four different topics. The first topic deals with the targetting of civilians in times of war. This discussion is one which has been largely governed by the developments of technologies which have allowed projectiles to be discharged over ever greater areas, and attempts to prevent their indiscriminate utilisation have struggled to keep pace. The second topic concerns the destruction of the natural environment, with particular regard to the utilisation of starvation as a method of warfare, and unlike the first topic, this one has rarely changed over thousands of years, although contemporary practices are beginning to represent a clear break from tradition. The third topic is concerned with the long-standing problems of civilians under the occupation of opposing military forces, where the practices of genocide, collective punishments and/or reprisals, and rape have occurred. The final topic in this volume is about the theft or destruction of the property of the enemy, in terms of either pillage or the intentional devastation of the cultural property of the opposition. As a work of reference this set of three books is unrivalled, and will be of immense benefit to scholars and practitioners researching and advising on the laws of warfare. It also tells a story which throws fascinating new light on the history of international law and on the history of warfare itself.

This unique work of reference traces the origins of the modern laws of warfare from the earliest times to the present day. Relying on written records from as far back as 2400 BCE, and using sources ranging from the Bible to Security Council Resolutions, the author pieces together the history of a subject which is almost as old as civilisation itself. The author shows that as long as humanity has been waging wars it has also been trying to find ways of legitimising different forms of combatants and ascribing rules to them, protecting civilians who are either inadvertently or intentionally caught up between them, and controlling the use of particular classes of weapons that may be used in times of conflict. Thus it is that this work is divided into three substantial parts: Volume 1 on the laws affecting combatants and captives; Volume 2 on civilians; and Volume 3 on the law of arms control. This third volume deals with the question of the control of weaponry, from the Bronze Age to the Nuclear Age. In doing so, it divides into two parts: namely, conventional weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction. The examination of the history of arms control of conventional weapons begins with the control of weaponry so that one side could achieve a military advantage over another. This pattern, which only began to change centuries after the advent of gunpowder, was later supplemented by ideals to control types of conventional weapons because their impacts upon opposing combatants were inhumane. By the late twentieth century, the concerns over inhumane conventional weapons were being supplemented by concerns over indiscriminate conventional weapons. The focus on indiscriminate weapons, when applied on a mass scale, is the core of the second part of the volume. Weapons of Mass Destruction are primarily weapons of the latter half of the twentieth century. Although both chemical and biological warfare have long historical lineages, it was only after the Second World War that technological developments meant that these weapons could be applied to cause large-scale damage to non-combatants. thi is unlike uclear weapons, which are a truly modern invention. Despite being the newest Weapon of Mass Destruction, they are also the weapon of which most international attention has been applied, although the frameworks by which they were contained in the last century, appear inadequate to address the needs of current times. As a work of reference this set of three books is unrivalled, and will be of immense benefit to scholars and practitioners researching and advising on the laws of warfare. It also tells a story which throws fascinating new light on the history of international law and on the history of warfare itself.

This unique new work of reference traces the origins of the modern laws of warfare from the earliest times to the present day. Relying on written records from as far back as 2400 BCE, and using sources ranging from the Bible to Security Council Resolutions, the author pieces together the history of a subject which is almost as old as civilisation itself. The author shows that as long as humanity has been waging wars it has also been trying to find ways of legitimising different forms of combatants and regulating the treatment of captives. This first book on warfare deals with the broad question of whether the patterns of dealing with combatants and captives have changed over the last 5,000 years, and if so, how? In terms of context, the first part of the book is about combatants and those who can 'lawfully' take part in combat. In many regards, this part of the first volume is a series of 'less than ideal' pathways. This is because in an ideal world there would be no combatants because there would be no fighting. Yet as a species we do not live in such a place or even anywhere near it, either historically or in contemporary times. This being so, a second-best alternative has been to attempt to control the size of military forces and, therefore, the bloodshed. This is also not the case by which humanity has worked over the previous centuries. Rather, the clear assumption for thousands of years has been that authorities are allowed to build the size of their armed forces as large as they wish. The restraints that have been applied are in terms of the quality and methods by which combatants are taken. The considerations pertain to questions of biology such as age and sex, geographical considerations such as nationality, and the multiple nuances of informal or formal combatants. These questions have also overlapped with ones of compulsion and whether citizens within a country can be compelled to fight without their consent. Accordingly, for the previous 3,000 years, the question has not been whether there should be a limit on the number of soldiers, but rather who is or is not a lawful combatant. It has rarely been a question of numbers. It has been, and remains, one of type. The second part of this book is about people, typically combatants, captured in battle. It is about what happens to their status as prisoners, about the possibilities of torture, assistance if they are wounded and what happens to their remains should they be killed and their bodies fall into enemy hands. The theme that ties all of these considerations together is that all of the acts befall those who are, to one degree or another, captives of their enemies. As such, they are no longer masters of their own fate. As a work of reference this first volume, as part of a set of three, is unrivalled, and will be of immense benefit to scholars and practitioners researching and advising on the laws of warfare. It also tells a story which throws fascinating new light on the history of international law and on the history of warfare itself.

How, despite the enormous investment of blood and treasure, has the West's ten-year intervention left Afghanistan so lawless and insecure? The answer is more insidious than any conspiracy, for it begins with a profound lack of understanding of the rule of law, the very thing that most dramatically separates Western societies from the benighted ones in which they increasingly intervene. This volume of essays argues that the rule of law is not a set of institutions that can be exported lock, stock and barrel to lawless lands, but a state of affairs under which ordinary people and officials of the state itself feel it makes sense to act within the law. Where such a state of affairs is absent, as in Afghanistan today, brute force, not law, will continue to rule.

This book explores the distinction and relationship between two principal branches of international law regulating the use of force: jus ad bellum (international law regulating the resort to force) and jus in bello (international humanitarian law). Two principles traditionally govern the relationship between the two: 1) separation of jus ad bellum and jus in bello and 2) equal application of jus in bello to the conflicting parties. These principles emerged in response to the claim that a conflicting party using force illegally under jus ad bellum should not benefit from the protection for victims of armed conflict under jus in bello, which would completely defeat the humanitarian purpose of jus in bello to protect all victims of armed conflict impartially. There is, however, a third principle: concurrent application of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Unlike in the past, jus ad bellum now regulates the use of force during a conflict alongside jus in bello and hence, the two are now considered as one set of rules applying during a conflict. The book explores in detail the interaction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello in the light of these three principles. The relationship between the two has been principally discussed in the context of the use of force in self-defence and international armed conflict. However, this book examines the relationship in other contexts of a very different nature, namely the use of force under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, non-international armed conflict, and armed conflict of a mixed character. The book concludes that the three principles governing the relationship are equally valid, with certain variations, in these different contexts.

This book carefully and thoroughly analyses the legal questions raised by the phenomenon of terrorism, and past and recent efforts to fight it, from the perspective of international humanitarian law (IHL). The objective is to substantially contribute to a better understanding of the issues surrounding the content and applicability of IHL as it applies to terrorism as well as to analyse and contextualise the current debates on these controversial and critically important questions. While due heed is paid to doctrinal debates, particular emphasis is placed on the practice of social actors, particularly, although not exclusively, States. The analysis of their actual conduct as well as their expectations about the interpretation and application of the law is crucial to establishing an interpretive consensus on when and how IHL is relevant to regulate acts of terrorism. The approach of the book is analytical and discursive, rather than prescriptive. Thus the reader will find the relevant rules of IHL and other legal regimes as regards terrorism, but also the debates over their application, the contradictions in State practice and the impact these may have upon IHL's evolution and implementation. The aim is to provide legal practitioners, as well as those in military, political and academic circles, with a useful reference point. Hopefully the book will also prove useful to other readers who will find its content and easy-to-read style an encouragement to getting acquainted with a topical subject, traditionally thought to be reserved for legal specialists. This book was cited with approval by the US Court of Appeals in Salim Ahmed Hamdan v United States of America, 16th October 2012

1.1 Opening Remarks and Objectives Crimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law 2 be enforced. This is, perhaps, the most renowned citation from the judgment of the Int- national Military Tribunal at Nuremberg ("IMT"). In the six decades which have passed since the IMT judgment was handed down, the recognition of the c- cept of individual criminal responsibility for core international crimes has been significantly reinforced and developed, particularly since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ("ICTY") and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda ("ICTR") in the 1990's and most recently the International Criminal Court ("ICC"). The media has, of course, played a crucial role in increasing awareness of this concept, especially amongst the general populace. Indeed, the concept has, arguably, a much higher profile today, than ever before in its history. However, the concept of individual criminal responsibility for core inter- tional crimes is neither as straightforward nor as single-facetted, as might appear on first glance. While the general principle behind the concept does not generate too many difficulties, it is in its practical application that the more challenging aspects of the concept are brought to the fore. Each of these 'challenging - pects' can also be described as a 'pertinent issue' of the concept of individual criminal responsibility for core international crimes.

International human rights law grants individuals both rights and responsibilities. In this respect international criminal and international humanitarian law are no different. As members of the public international law family they are charged with the regulation, maintenance and protection of human dignity. The right and duty to disobey manifestly illegal orders traverses these three schools of public international law. This book is the first systematic study of the right to conscientious objection under international human rights law. Understanding that rights and duties are not mutually exclusive but complementary, this study analyses the right to conscientious objection and the duties of individuals under international law from various perspectives of public international law.

Recent armed conflicts, whether international or non-international in character, are in many respects characterized by a variety of asymmetries. These asymmetries may be overstressed, sometime even abused, and ultimately virtually meaningless. Still, either as such or in conjunction with other developments, they seem to challenge the law of armed conflicts or: international humanitarian law. These challenges may very well compromise the very function of that body of law, which is to mitigate as far as possible the calamities of war. Thus, the law of armed conflict may be deprived of its fundamental function as an order of necessity because its legally binding directives will increasingly be disregarded for the sake of allegedly superior values.

In order to discuss these and other questions a most distinguished group of experts in the field of the law of armed conflicts gathered in Berlin in June 2005. The goal of that colloquium, which marked the 70th birthday of Knut Ipsen, was to find operable solutions for problems and challenges the contemporary law of armed conflict is confronted with.

With contributions by Bill Boothby, Michael Bothe, Yoram Dinstein, Knut Dormann, Charles J. Dunlap Jr., Volker Epping, Dieter Fleck, Steven Haines, Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg, Hans-Joachim Heintze, Rainer Hofmann, Frits Kalshoven, Stefan Oeter, W. Hays Parks, Michael Schmitt, Torsten Stein, and Andreas Zimmermann."

The book is a critical review of accountability conducted under the authority of the United Nations Security Council, by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). It is centred on two case studies: the 1999 events in Rwanda, and the 1999 mayhem in East Timor. The books subjects to testing cross-examination tools to hold accountable persons with the greatest responsibility" for serious international humanitarian law violations.

Since the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, jihad has become symbolic of the confrontation between Muslims and the West. According to popular views, jihad represents a religiously sanctioned war to propagate or defend the faith by defensive and aggressive means. However, there is not one single meaning of jihad, but many different interpretations. In the most recent decades of Islamic history, jihad was invoked as an instrument for the legitimation of political action, be it armed resistance against foreign occupation, the struggle for self-determination, or retaliatory attacks against the West. The evolution and contemporary abuses of jihad cannot be understood without a connection to the modern political context in which such action takes place. The aim of this book is thus to clarify the meanings of jihad and the manipulation of its sense since the rise of political Islam during the 1960s. Its authors address the intellectual underpinnings of the concept of jihad, and link it to the narratives and historical contexts in which jihad in its various meanings has been interpreted and applied. It draws a parallel between Islamic humanitarian tradition and international humanitarian law, challenging the distorted interpretation of peace and war in Islam. It aims also at exploring the impact that jihad has on international law and domestic law through state practice and in view of the mounting call that law should adapt to the new reality of transnational terrorism. The mixture of authors from Muslim as well as Western countries allows for a true dialogue between cultures and a diversity of views on the issue. This book is obviously highly recommended reading for academics and practitioners dealing with Islamic, national and international law and all those intrigued by and interested in the subject. Professor M. Cherif Bassiouni is Distinguished Research Professor of Law Emeritus, and President Emeritus, at the International Human Rights Law Institute, DePaul University College of Law, Chicago, Illinois. He has served the United Nations in various capacities, all in the field of humanitarian law, international criminal law and human rights law. Amna Guellali is a Senior Researcher at the department of international humanitarian and criminal law of the T.M.C. Asser Instituut, The Hague, The Netherlands.

A number of commentators assert that the military response to the terrorist atrocities of 11 September 2001 - encompassing attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, and commonly referred to as the 'war on terror' - has significantly impacted upon the international law regulating resort to armed force by states (jus ad bellum), loosening the constraints on self-defence. Some even suggest that the very future of the United Nations, in particular the Security Council and its collective security system, is at risk - at least in its current form. This book does not address the question of the future of the United Nations, an issue probably best left to scholars of international relations. Instead, it seeks to place the 'war on terror' within the context of international law, assessing how, or whether, it can be accommodated within the existing legal framework limiting the use of force. Through an examination of the lawfulness (or otherwise) of both Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, including the legal justifications advanced by those states involved and the reaction of the international community, and involving a detailed discussion of the most important developments (ie, the permissibility of self-defence against non-state, terrorist, actors and the 'Bush doctrine' of pre-emptive self-defence against terrorists as proclaimed in the 2002 US National Security Strategy) the book determines whether, and to what extent, the right to use force - or the acceptability of such military action - is currently undergoing a radical transformation. By assessing subsequent developments illustrating the impact that military action against Afghanistan and Iraq has had on the jus ad bellum, this book represents a distinctive and original contribution to the academic literature.