Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Conflict in 2006 Case Essay
Order ID: 89JHGSJE83839 Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages: 5-10 Instructions:
. Qualification of the conflict and applicable law
1. (Part I, paras 53-55; Part II, para. [1]) How does the Human Rights Council (HRC) Commission of Inquiry (hereinafter the Commission) qualify the conflict? How does Human Rights Watch qualify it? How do you qualify it? (GC I-IV, Art. 2; P I, Art. 1; P II, Art. 2)
2. Was it an international armed conflict only because Lebanon never consented to the military operations carried out by Israel against Hezbollah? What is the threshold for qualification as an international armed conflict? Is it sufficient that the armed forces of a State cross its border and enter foreign territory? Is it sufficient if only one soldier crosses the border? (GC I-IV, Art. 2)
3. (Part I, paras 57; Part II, paras [14]-[15]) Do you agree with the Commission that Hezbollah may be qualified as a militia under Art. 4(A)(2) of GC III? Is this in accordance with the Commissions conclusion that Lebanon and Hezbollah were two different parties to the conflict (para. 55)? What are the necessary conditions for an armed group to be considered a militia under Art. 4(A)(2) of GC III? Does Hezbollah fulfil all the requirements listed in Art. 4(A)(2)(a)-(d)? Can Hezbollah be regarded as a militia even though the Lebanese government does not endorse its actions? Could the mere fact that Lebanons President Emile Lahoud paid tribute to the National Resistance fighters be enough to infer a relationship of subordination between Lebanon and Hezbollah? What consequences does your answer to these questions have for the qualification of the conflict? [See also United States, Status and Treatment of Detainees Held in Guantanamo Naval Base]
4. (Part I, paras 41, 54) Do you agree with Israel that Lebanon is responsible for the acts of Hezbollah? May Hezbollah be considered a State organ only because it is represented in the Parliament and in the Cabinet? Or may it be argued that it was exercising elements of governmental authority? From the information given in the report, can it be said that Hezbollah is acting on the instructions of Lebanon or under Lebanons direction or control? Which test should be used here to determine whether Lebanon is internationally responsible for the acts committed by Hezbollah? Which elements should be taken into account? If Lebanon was not responsible for Hezbollahs acts, could the hostilities still qualify as an international armed conflict? Should the same test be used to determine both the nature of the conflict and the responsibility of Lebanon? [See also International Law Commission, Articles on State Responsibility, Arts 4, 5, 7, 8; ICJ, Nicaragua v. United States; ICTY, The Prosecutor v. Tadic, in particular Part D., Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro]
5. (Part I, paras 53, 58; Part II, para. [1]) Could the conflict be purely non-international even though IDF conducted operations on Lebanese soil and targeted Lebanese installations? (GC I-IV, Art. 2; P II, Art. 1)
6. Could both the IHL of international armed conflicts apply to IDF attacks on Lebanon and IDF occupation of Lebanese territory and the IHL of non-international armed conflicts apply to hostilities between IDF and Hezbollah? If yes, how would one distinguish whether an attack on a given target or the detention of a given person is covered by the IHL of international or of non-international armed conflicts? May Hezbollah fighters detained by Israel be both protected persons under GC IV and members of an armed group covered by common Art. 3?
B. Qualification of the persons
7. (Part I, para. 40) What is the status of the two Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah? What protection are they afforded under IHL? What would be the status of Hezbollah members captured by IDF? (GC III, Art. 4; GC IV, Art. 4; P II, Art. 5)
8. (Part I, para. 104) Do you agree that a distinction should be made between professional Hezbollah fighters and civilian militia volunteers ( ) who took up arms during the conflict? Does such a distinction exist in IHL? What is the status of each of these two categories in the conduct of hostilities? When may they be directly targeted? What is their status when they fall into the power of Israel? [See Israel, The Targeted Killings Case] (GC III, Art. 4; GC IV, Arts 4 and 5; P I, Art. 51(3); P II, Art. 13)
9. (Part I, para. 158) Do you agree that after issuing an order to the population to evacuate southern Lebanon, Israel was allowed to consider every person remaining in the area to be a Hezbollah supporter who could be directly targeted? (P I, Arts 50(1) and 51(3); P II, Art. 13)
C. Conduct of hostilities
10. (Part I, paras 116-117) Do you agree with the Commission that Hezbollah offices and political headquarters are not necessarily military objectives? In which circumstances may such buildings be attacked? (P I, Art. 52(2); CIHL, Rules 8-10)
11. (Part I, para. 139) What is the status of water facilities? May they be attacked? Why? (P I, Art. 54; P II, Art. 14; CIHL, Rules 53-54)
12.
a. (Part I, paras 140-143) What is the status of the Lebanese TV and radio stations? Do you agree with the report that a distinction should be made between the Hezbollah-backed TV and the Lebanese TV stations? If there is an international armed conflict with Lebanon, what is the status of the Lebanese TV stations? (P I, Art. 52(2) and (3))
b. Do you agree that merely disseminating propaganda to generate support for the war effort does not suffice to turn a TV station into a legitimate military objective? Is the Al-Manar TV station a legitimate military objective, taking into account the fact that it has also helped the organization recruit people into its ranks? May the dissemination of propaganda be considered as an effective contribution to military action? Is a radio station a military objective if it calls upon its audience to commit war crimes? To commit lawful hostile acts? (P I, Art. 52(2); CIHL, Rules 8-10)
c. Do you agree that even Al-Manar TV is not a legitimate military target? Is the Commissions finding here consistent with the conclusion of the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia? [See Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, NATO Intervention, paras 71-79] In your opinion, when may a TV station be attacked? (P I, Art. 52(2); CIHL, Rule 10)
13. Part I, paras 146-148) Does a hypothetical use of a civilian building or object by the enemy suffice to turn it into a legitimate military objective? Would this be in accordance with the principle that a military objective must provide the enemy with an effective contribution to military action? Do you agree with the Commission that the dual use argument turns every civilian object into a potential military target? (P I, Art. 52(2) and (3))
14. (Part I, paras 149-158) What does the obligation to give the civilian population, when possible, effective advance warning entail? What renders a warning effective? May Israel, by issuing a warning or imposing curfews, be allowed not to distinguish between fighters and non-fighters? May Israel assume that after it has taken such measures, civilians have cleared the area, therefore allowing for its bombardment? Do such measures dispense a party from taking precautions to verify that no civilians are present in the area to be targeted? (P I, Art. 57(2)(c); CIHL, Rule 20)
15. (Part I, paras 163-164) Do you agree that the fact whether or not the hospital had a Red Cross flag flying on its roof is relatively unimportant? Is there an obligation under IHL for hospitals to be marked with the emblem in wartime? When they do display an emblem in wartime, what size should it be? What is the role of the emblem in such cases? May hospitals be targeted when they do not display any emblem? (GC I, Art. 42; GC IV, Art. 18(3)-(4); P I, Art. 12; P II, Art. 12; CIHL, Rules 28 and 30)
16.
a. (Part I, paras 172-177) What is the status of National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies? Of civil defence organizations? What protection are they afforded under IHL? Were the IDF attacks against the Lebanese Red Cross and the Lebanese Civil Defence war crimes? Were they grave breaches? (GC I, Art. 26; P I, Arts 8(c), 61-67, 71, 85; CIHL, Rule 31; ICC Statute, Art. 8(2)(b)(iii) and (xxiv))
b. (Part I, paras 184-186) What are the obligations of the parties to an armed conflict regarding the passage of goods and humanitarian relief? May the establishment of a blockade dispense the parties from their obligations to allow the free passage of humanitarian relief? Should a party cancel an attack on a legitimate military objective if it is evident that the attack will impede the free passage of humanitarian workers and relief supplies? (GC IV, Art. 23; P I, Arts 51(5)(b), 52(2) and 70; CIHL, Rules 55-56)
17. (Part I, paras 188-192) What is protected by the rules of IHL relating to religious objects? Do they only protect places of worship, or also spiritual and religious objects such as those mentioned in para. 188? Does the conduct criticized in para. 188 constitute an attack? Are only attacks against religious objects prohibited? May IDF use such objects? Is the exception provided for in Art. 4(2) of the Hague Convention of 1954 also applicable to places of worship? [See Conventions on the Protection of Cultural Property, Part A.] (HR, Art. 27; P I, Art. 53; P II, Art. 16; CIHL, Rules 38-40)
18.
a. (Part I, paras 199-208) What is the protection granted to internally displaced persons (IDPs) under IHL? Do they benefit from special protection? What is the status of IDPs under IHL? (GC IV, Art. 4; CIHL, Arts 129-133)
b. (Part I, para. 207) Is internal displacement necessarily unlawful? When may evacuation be lawful under IHL? What are the obligations of the parties when civilians voluntarily choose to leave the region because of the armed conflict? Does the displacement itself become a violation of IHL when it is caused by indiscriminate attacks from which the civilian population tries to escape? Does every displacement amount to deportation? Are deportations during an armed conflict always prohibited? (GC IV, Arts 49, 147; P II, Art. 17)
19. (Part I, paras 209-220) Was the Jiyyeh power plant a military target? Considering the probable effect on the environment, was it lawful to attack it? Why? Do you assess the legality of the two attacks the same way? Do you think that all the necessary precautionary measures were taken by IDF before the second attack? Could they foresee that the retaining wall would collapse (para. 210)? Did the attack cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the environment? How do you define these terms? (P I, Arts 35(3), 52(2) and 55(1); CIHL, Rules 43-45; Rome Statute, 8(2)(b)(iv))
20. (Part I, paras 213-215) Were the damaged chemical plants protected by IHL? Considering that they released chemical substances into the ground, into water sources and into the air, may they be considered as installations containing dangerous forces and be protected as such? What is protected by Art. 56 of Protocol I? Are only dams, dykes and nuclear power stations protected? (P I, Arts 52 and 56)
21. (Part I, paras 221-229) How is cultural and historical property protected in wartime? Are historical sites protected even when they are not included in the UNESCO World Heritage List? Should an attack be cancelled or suspended when, though not directly targeting a cultural site, it may cause some damage to it? (P I, Art. 53; CIHL, Rules 38-41; Rome Statute, 8(2)(b)(ix)) [See also Conventions on the Protection of Cultural Property]
22.
a. (Part I, paras 233-246) Does IHL apply to UNIFIL personnel and personnel of the Observer Group Lebanon? Does IHL protect them? What is their status? (GC III, Art. 4; GC IV, Art. 4)
b. (Part I, paras 233-246; Part II, paras [12]-[13]) May IDF directly target UNIFIL personnel? May it attack Hezbollah positions near UNIFIL outposts? In which circumstances, if ever, may members of peacekeeping operations be directly targeted? [See Convention on the Safety of UN Personnel, Arts 2, 7]
c. (Part I, para. 233) May IDF directly target United Nations personnel moving close to the Blue Line? If it has previously issued a warning? May IDF shoot indiscriminately at any vehicle entering the security zone? (P I, Art. 52(2); CIHL, Rule 33)
23.
a. (Part I, paras 249-256) Were cluster munitions prohibited during the conflict? In which circumstances may a State use cluster munitions? Which rules apply to them? Do you think that their use by IDF was proportionate (para. 251)? [See Convention on Cluster Munitions]
b. (Part I, paras 258-259) Is the use of white phosphorous weapons prohibited under IHL? If not, what are the rules governing its use? Was the use of white phosphorous weapons by Israel in the present case lawful? Why? [See Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III to the 1980 Convention), in particular Art. 1(b)(i)] (CIHL, Rules 70-71)
c. (Part I, para. 263) Was the use of dense inert metal explosives (DIME) by Israel lawful under IHL? [See Protocol on Non-Detectable Fragments (Protocol I to the 1980 Convention)] (CIHL, Rule 79)
24.
a. (Part I, paras 268-275) Was the sea and air blockade of Lebanon by Israel lawful under IHL? Does the fact that Hezbollah was using the harbours justify the sea blockade? Does this amount to reprisals? To collective punishments? [See also San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, Arts 93-104] (P I, Arts 49(3), 51(6), 54, 70 and 75(2))
b. (Part I, para. 272) Does the blockade dispense the parties to the conflict from their obligations to allow and facilitate the passage of humanitarian relief? [See also San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, Arts 93-104] (P I, Arts 49(3), 51(6), 54, 70 and 75(2), CIHL, Rules 55-56)
25. (Part II, paras [6]-[11]) Do you agree with Human Rights Watch that human shielding should be distinguished from the failure to take all necessary passive precautions to minimize harm to civilians? Is the difference between the two obligations based upon intent? Does it make a difference for the adverse party when it plans an attack? Would Israel be allowed to target the Hezbollah members among the civilian population in either of the two situations? Would it be easy for the adverse party to distinguish between human shielding and a failure to take passive precautions for the benefit of the civilian population? (P I, Arts 51(8) and 58; CIHL, Rule 97)
D. Applicability of IHL to armed groups
26. (Part I, paras 60 and 67; Part II) Do you agree with the Commission and Human Rights Watch that Hezbollah is bound by IHL? Does the answer to this question depend on the nature of the armed conflict (international or non-international)? If the conflict is international, is Hezbollah a party to it?
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Conflict in 2006 Case Essay
Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Conflict in 2006 Case Essay