The armed conflict in Syria Case Study
Order ID: 89JHGSJE83839 Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages: 5-10 Instructions:
I. Qualification of the situation and applicable law
1. (Document A, paras. 1 2; Document B, paras. 15 18; Document C, para. 9)
a. When does a non-international armed conflict begin? Is there a threshold beneath which Art. 3 common to the Conventions does not apply? Is it necessary for a rebel group to control territory in order for Common Art. 3 to apply? In order to determine if the group is sufficiently organized? In order to determine whether the group is a party to the conflict?
b. Is it possible to have a non-international armed conflict only in part of States territory? When, where and to whom would IHL apply in this case?
c. If Syria had been a party to it, would AP II have applied? Is it customary law? Assuming AP II is customary law, would it be binding to all the parties involved in the conflict?
d. Are armed groups and States armed forces bound by exactly the same rules? In the field of IHL? Of international criminal law? Of international human rights law (IHRL)?
e. When the rules provided by the IHL of NIAC are insufficient, should reference be made to the rules of IAC by analogy or, instead, to IHRL?
II. Conduct of hostilities – General
a. Is the qualification of the conflict relevant for the applicability of the law on the conduct of hostilities?
b. Are the obligations to take precautionary measures and to respect the proportionality principle as prescribed in Art. 57 of AP I the same in international and non-international armed conflicts? Why? Because they can be derived from the actual practice of belligerents? Because they are necessary in order to comply with the substantive provisions?
3.
How would you explain Section IX of the ICRC Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities (i.e. whenever possible, capture should be preferred to killing)? Do you agree with this approach, considering the general situation in Syria? [See ICRC, Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities]
4. (Document A, para. 4)
Are the National Security Headquarters in Damascus a legitimate military objective? Why? (CIHL, Rules 7 10; P I, Art. 52)
5. (Document A, paras. 16 18)
How is a bakery protected under IHL? Under what conditions, if ever, can such a building become a legitimate target? Were the bakeries in the present case legitimate targets? Are FSA members carrying out policing functions legitimate targets? What is your assessment of the legality of the attacks on the bakeries in the present case? [See ICRC, Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities] (CIHL, Rules 1, 7, 11-21; P I, Arts 48, 51, 52 and 57)
6. (Document A, paras. 19 20)
What protection do hospitals enjoy under IHL? Can they become military targets? If yes, under what conditions? (CIHL, Rules 25, 27 and 30; P II, Art. 11; GC I, Arts. 19 and 21; GC IV, Arts 18 and 19; P I, Arts. 12, 13)
7. (Document A, paras. 21 28)
Was the attack on the Dar al-Shifa Hospital in Aleppo City lawful? Does it make a difference whether the hospital was displaying the red crescent emblem? Can the attack amount to a grave breach? (CIHL, Rules 7-10, 28, 30 and 151; P II, Art. 11; GC I, Arts. 19 22, 42, 50; GC IV, Arts. 18 19, 147; P I, Arts 12 13, 85)
8. (Document A, paras. 35 36)
How are schools protected under IHL? Under what circumstances, if ever, can such buildings become legitimate targets? Were the schools described in para. 42 43 legitimate targets? Was it lawful to attack them as described in the case? (CIHL, Rules 1, 7, 11-21; P I, Arts 48, 51, 52 and 57)
9. (Document A, paras. 35 36)
a. In this case, what were the obligations of the Syrian armed forces regarding precautions in attack? Under what circumstances should a warning be given? What do feasible and effective in Art. 57 P I mean? Is a warning effective only if civilians heed it? What kind of warning could have been given in relation to the attacks on schools?
b. What precautions must a defender take to protect the civilian population against the effects of attacks? Is it always possible to avoid locating military targets in populated areas? Is this a strict obligation under IHL? In light of Art. 51 (7) P I? (CIHL, Rule 23; P I, Art. 58)
10. (Document C, para. 4)
Is holding a city under siege a legitimate method of warfare? Does IHL prohibit siege or simply limit it? If the latter, how? Is your answer the same for both IAC and NIAC? If so, do the same rules apply in both cases?
III. Conduct of hostilities – Weapons
11. (Document A, paras. 7 15)
a. Are high explosive weapons unlawful? Do you agree with this statement: The frequency of government air strikes in Syria that have struck only civilians and civilian objects with high-explosive munitions in populated areas indicates that those ordering the air strikes have been acting deliberately or recklessly? Why/Why not?
b. If a party uses high-explosive weapons in densely populated areas, is it under an obligation to use precision guided munition, or smart munitions?
12. (Document A, paras. 29 34)
Are cluster bombs unlawful weapons? Is it necessarily prohibited to use them in densely populated areas? In what circumstances, if ever, can cluster bombs be used by states not parties to the Convention on Cluster munitions? [See Convention on Cluster munitions] (CIHL, Rule 17; P I, 51 (4) and 57 (2) (a) (ii))
13. (Document A, para. 34)
Considering that some casualties resulted from unexploded devices, do you think that, when assessing the proportionality of an attack, the expected civilian harm should also encompass casualties and harm over time? Even casualties and harm expected to occur after the end of the conflict? Does the law require the possibility of future civilian harm to be taken into account when evaluating the proportionality of an attack? (CIHL, Rule 14; P I, Art. 51 (5) (b))
III. Conduct of hostilities Starvation
14. (Document C, paras. 2, 10 12)
a. Is starvation an inevitable consequence of armed conflicts? How can one determine whether starvation of a besieged town comprising fighters and civilians constitutes prohibited starvation as a method of warfare against civilians? If a party uses starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, does it thereby commit a war crime? Would your response to the previous question change depending on whether a conflict is international or non-international in character? (CIHL, Rule 54; P II, Art. 14; P I, Art. 54; ICC Statute, Art. 8 (2) (b) (xxv); See The International Criminal Court)
b. Even if starvation as a method of warfare is not specifically directed at civilians, how may actions resulting in famine constitute a violation of IHL? In the context of the Syrian conflict?
15. (Document A, paras. 2 and 10)
Can a party to a conflict deny humanitarian organizations access to victims of war, in particular those suffering the effects of famine, without violating IHL? Can it deny the ICRC access to the victims? Can it deny other humanitarian organizations access? How do your responses to the above relate to the present case? (GC I IV, Art. 3; P II, Art. 18 (2); GC IV, Arts 23, 55 and 59-63; P I, Arts 69, 70 and 81).
IV. Status of the wounded and of medical personnel
16. (Document C, paras. 13 14)
What protection do medical workers enjoy in the present case? Is their capture always unlawful under IHL? In the present case? If they are captured in order to give treatment to wounded and sick fighters? (CIHL, Rule 25; GC I IV, Art. 3; P II, Arts. 9 10; GC I, Art. 28; GC III, Art. 33)
17. (Document C, paras. 15 25)
What are the parties obligations in relation to the treatment of wounded or sick people in the present case? Does IHL provide protection to women in this regard? (CIHL, Rules 110 and 134; GC I-IV, common Art. 3(2)) In light of what it is stated in para. 16, what are your considerations in relation to the situation of women in armed conflicts? Is it a case where the so-called special protection would be needed? Is IHL adequate in this regard?
V. Conduct of Hostilities – Displacement
18. (Document A, paras. 1 and 6, Document C, para. 3)
a. How would you qualify the displacement of civilians that occurred since 2012 under IHL? Does it make a difference legally whether the population fled to escape from the hostilities or because it was forcibly expelled? If it was because of the conduct of hostilities, does it matter whether IHL was respected or not in conducting those hostilities? Would it make a difference whether the population was forced to leave by the Syrian armed forces or by the rebels? Was the Syrian government bound by the prohibition of forced displacements? (CIHL, Rule 129; P II, Art 17)
b. What is the protection afforded by IHL to displaced persons? What other legal frameworks could be relevant in this regard?
VI. Conduct of Hostilities – Pillage
19. (Document C, paras. 10, 17 and 24)
a. Did armed opposition groups that looted premises, stole medical supplies and seized the Palestine Hospitals fleet of five ambulances commit violations of IHL? War crimes? (CIHL, Rule 52; GC IV, Art. 33)
b. Does the prohibition of pillage apply to armed groups? How is the applicability of this prohibition in non-international armed conflicts problematic?
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 The armed conflict in Syria Case Study
The armed conflict in Syria Case Study