Proportionality and precautions in attack: The reverberating effects of using explosive weapons in populated areas

Abstract

During an armed conflict, the use of explosive weapons with wide area effects in populated areas has a devastating impact on civilians. Less visible than the direct effects of explosive weapons, but equally devastating, are the reverberating effects of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas. While there is growing consensus that parties to an armed conflict are legally obliged to take into account the reasonably foreseeable reverberating effects of an attack, particularly for the purposes of the rules on proportionality and precautions in attack, the precise scope of this obligation remains unclear. After setting out the legal arguments in support of the position that reasonably foreseeable reverberating effects must be taken into account, this article goes on to examine how such effects should be evaluated and how they must be avoided or minimized.

The political and security dimensions of the humanitarian health response to violent conflict

“…33 Although dual-use structures might have both civilian and military value, their destruction can have indirect effects that can drastically outweigh military necessity. 19,34,35 Some types of infrastructure, such as urban water systems, are designated for protection. Despite these protections, Saudi-led airstrikes in 2015-18 on water infra structure in Yemen have probably contributed to one of the most serious cholera outbreaks on record, with more than 2•1 million cases and 3700 deaths between 2017 and 2019.…”

Revisiting the Battle of Solferino: The Worsening Plight of Civilian Casualties in War and Conflict

“…9 Civilian infrastructure, especially the protective public health base necessary for survival, is regularly the target of airstrikes with civilian casualties increasingly "accepted" as an outcome or by-product of conflict. 21 While news reports prioritize direct casualties resulting from weaponry, over time, indirect or preventable mortality will account for up to 70-90% of deaths from the loss of protective public health infrastructure (water, sanitation, food, shelter, access and availability of healthcare, energy). 22 Failures to restore these protections, as mandated by Articles 55 & 56 of the Geneva Convention, occurred in the 2003 Iraq war.…”

“…In addition to the shift of conflict to urban areas, this increase in civilian casualties is due to a change in the type of munitions 15 . Since 2013, CIVIC has focused on Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas (EWIPA), and along with ICRC advocate limiting the use of explosive weapons with “wide area” effects 15 – 17 . Humanitarian groups, human rights organizations, and the UN Secretary General himself consider EWIPA a key issue in addressing the effective protection of civilians in conflict today 16 – 18 .…”

Urban Warfare Ecology: A Study of Water Supply in Basrah

“…Even relatively precise attacks on military targets can cause knock‐on effects along the vicious cycle identified here, well beyond the direct impact zone of the explosive and long after the dust has settled. Such ‘reverberating effects’ of weaponry are the subject of debates about military targeting and proportionality in International Humanitarian Law (ICRC, : 5; Robinson and Nohle, ; Zeitoun and Talhami, ), and are attracting campaigns against the use of wide‐area explosives in populated areas (e.g. Brehm and Borrie, ; Rappert et al, ).…”