Targeting in the Russian-Ukrainian War: The Crossroads of Legal and Technical Aspects
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.106.03Keywords:
International Humanitarian Law, attacks, targeting, incidental harm (collateral damage), Rendulic ruleAbstract
Article 82 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions requires competent legal advisors to be available, when necessary, to advise military commanders at the appropriate level on the application of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). One of the most important fields of IHL application which requires legal advice is attacks on the enemy, which need to follow the principles of military necessity, humanity, distinction, and proportionality, and are also affected by the requirement to undertake all feasible precautions in order to avoid or at least minimise incidental harm to civilians (collateral damage). One of the ways to ensure that attacks on enemy remain compliant with the requirements of IHL is by adopting appropriate targeting procedures and tools facilitating avoidance or minimising collateral damage, such as the Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology (CDEM). Media coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian war has contributed significantly to the misperception of IHL provisions applicable to targeting. During the war in Ukraine, political declarations were made several times that a war crime had occurred in the form of a deliberate attack on the civilian object. However, the legality of a particular strike can rarely be judged based upon the results of the strike or via post-strike Battle Damage Assessment (BDA). The so-called Rendulic rule emphasises that military necessity, proportionality, and precautions are judged a priori, based upon by the information available at the time of the decision (circumstances ruling at the time) and not on the basis of information emerging after the decision had been made. Legal Advirsors’ role in the targeting process requires them to possess at least the basic knowledge of the Targeting Process and the CDEM, general military expertise in the fields of Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs), as well as effects of the employment of particular weapon systems in given circumstances. This should be supported by thorough knowledge of IHL, in particular the practical aspects of its application in military operations. It should be about the intersection of legal and technical expertise.
Downloads
References
Bellingcat Investigation Team. 2022. “Russia’s Kremenchuk Claims Versus the Evidence.” Bellingcat, June 29, 2022. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06/29/russias-kremenchuk-claims-versus-the-evidence/ (accessed: 2.11.2023).
Google Scholar
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 31260.01. 2009. No-Strike and the Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology.
Google Scholar
Collective Awareness to UXO. N.d. “9N510 (ML-5) Submunition”, https://cat-uxo.com/explosive-hazards/submunitions/9n510-ml-5-submunition (accessed: 31.10.2023).
Google Scholar
Department of Defense. 1992. “Conduct of the Persian Gulf War, Final Report to Congress” Washington, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA249270.pdf (accessed: 2.11.2023).
Google Scholar
Department of the Navy. Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters. US Marine Corps. Department of Homeland Security. US Coast Guard. 2007. The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1–14M/MCWP 5–12.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7.
Google Scholar
Hayashi, Nobuo. 2023. “Honest Errors, The Rendulic Rule and Modern Combat Decision-Making.” Lieber Institute West Point Articles of War, October 24, 2023. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/honest-errors-rendulic-rule-modern-combat-decision-making/
Google Scholar
Missilery. N.d. “Unguided rocket projectile MZ-21 (9M22S)”, Missilery.info, https://en.missilery.info/missile/grad/m3-21 (accessed: 31.10.2023).
Google Scholar
PAP. 2022. “Media: Rosja użyła w Czernichowie zakazanych lotniczych bomb zapalających.” Polska Agencja Prasowa, March 10, 2022, https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1110670%2Cmedia-rosja-uzyla-w-czernihowie-zakazanych-lotniczych-bomb-zapalajacych
Google Scholar
Piątkowski, Mateusz. 2013. “The Rendulic Rule and the Law of Aerial Warfare.” Polish Review of International and European Law 3: 69–85. https://doi.org/10.21697/priel.2013.2.3.03
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21697/priel.2013.2.3.03
Rosoboronexport. N.d. “OFZAB-500”, http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-systems/air-bombs/ofzab-500/ (accessed: 31.10.2023).
Google Scholar
Sliedregt, Elies van. 2003. The Criminal Responsibility of Individuals for Violations of International Humanitarian Law. Hague: TMC Asser Press.
Google Scholar
Smith, Micah. Ed. 2002. Operational Law Handbook. Charlottesville: The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School.
Google Scholar
International Military Tribunal Case 7: The “Hostage Case,” US v. List et al., https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/nmt_7_intro#judgement
Google Scholar
NATO. 2019. MC 0362/2, NATO Rules of Engagement, 18 July 2019.
Google Scholar
NATO. 2021. AJP-3.9 Allied Joint Doctrine for Joint Targeting. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/618e7da28fa8f5037ffaa03f/AJP-3.9_EDB_V1_E.pdf (accessed: 30.10.2023).
Google Scholar
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, Adopted June 8, 1977, Entered into Force December 7, 1978.
Google Scholar
United States Air Force. 2021. Air Force Doctrine Publication 3–60, Targeting, https://www.doctrine.af.mil/Portals/61/documents/AFDP_3-60/3-60-AFDP-TARGETING.pdf
Google Scholar
United States, Military Commissions Act. 2006. Public Law 109–366, Chapter 47A of Title 10 of the United States Code, October 17, 2006, p. 120 Stat. 2625, § 950v(a)(1), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-109publ366/html/PLAW-109publ366.htm (accessed: 21.10.2023)
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 2024-06-18 (2)
- 2024-03-30 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.