SummaryWhile the law of the sea is rightly viewed as the most suitable international legal regime for the settlement of disputes in the Arctic, the militarization of this region in an era of climate change is also observable. Yet curiously, scant attention has been paid to the constraints the international humanitarian law (IHL) would impose on armed conflict in the Arctic, as unlikely as such conflict may be. These constraints include the specific prohibition on causing widespread, long-term, and severe environmental damage under Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions as well as the related obligation to have “due regard” for the natural environment, as referred to in, for example, the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea. Similarly, environmental factors must play into military assessments of targets based on the general principles of IHL related to targeting. The authors explore how these various legal obligations could be applied in the Arctic context. Referring to the scientific literature, they suggest that, due to the particularly vulnerable nature of this regional environment, many traditional war-fighting techniques would lead to damage that is not legally permissible. This conclusion should provide an additional incentive to policy makers to demilitarize the Arctic and to solve peacefully any disputes that may arise over sovereignty, navigation, or resources.
There is growing interest in the push for individuals to seek direct remedies, notably compensation, for violations of international law. Yet, there is more for scholars to glean from the historical antecedents of compensation for individuals as a recurring idea in international law. The notion of ‘international claims’ can be traced back to the late 18th century. International claims commissions began as ad hoc arrangements that tended to follow wars. In contrast to existing historical accounts, however, the author shows there is more at work in the international law precedents for present-day mass claims than a simple rise and fall of a single idea of compensation, with the occasional isolated contemporary resurfacing. The author contends instead that the history of compensation is deeply linked to its context—meaning different things in different periods—and reflected in four models of compensation (Collateral Private Claims, Arbitration–Diplomatic Protection, Reparations and Institutional-Transition).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.