DOCSLIB.ORG

Military-Age Males in Us Counterinsurgency and Drone Warfare

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Military-Age Males in Us Counterinsurgency and Drone Warfare MILITARY-AGE MALES IN U.S COUNTERINSURGENCY AND DRONE WARFARE Sarah Shoker MILITARY-AGE MALES IN U.S COUNTERINSURGENCY AND DRONE WARFARE By SARAH SHOKER, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © Copyright by Sarah Shoker, April 2018 Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY(2018) Department of Political Science TITLE: Military-Age Males in U.S Counterinsurgency and Drone Warfare AUTHOR: Sarah Shoker, B.A., M.A (University of Saskatchewan) SUPERVISOR: Dr. J. Marshall Beier NUMBER OF PAGES: v, 146 i Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science Abstract In 2012, The New York Times reported that the Obama Administration excluded all Military-Age Males from the collateral damage count in areas where the U.S engaged in drone warfare/ Though the Military-Age Male (MAM) category references the draft, the term is applied to all boys and men, including civilians, who are aged sixteen years and older. The Military-Aged Male category is not synonymous with 'combatant,' but marks boys and men for differentiated treatment in conflict zones, to the point where male bodies are used as a shorthand for 'combatant' when assessing the collateral damage count. This dissertation seeks to answer an empirical puzzle. The U.S Army/Marine Corps Counter- Insurgency Field Manual (2006), a document which emerged from the American intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, emphasizes that militants vie for the civilian population's support as a way to win the war against a stronger and better-resourced military force. These documents state that the United States cannot rely on military prowess alone and that, in fact, “non-military means are the most effective” way to win an irregular war against militant groups. Both the Bush Jr. and Obama Administrations used the Military-Age Male category to structure military strategy, meaning that civilian protection was applied asymmetrically and that military violence was legitimized when directed against male civilians. These security practices would seemingly cause resentment from a large segment of the population and undermine the success of U.S foreign policy. This dissertation documents the political ecosystem that legitimized violent military action against the 'Military-Age Male.' Specifically, I examine Military-Age Males under the Bush and Obama Administrations and illustrate how counterinsurgency and drone warfare became practices that were sustained by an elaborate bureaucracy that interpreted the battlespace—and combatant from civilian— by using assumptions about gender. ii Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science Acknowledgments Academics are supported by a large group of people who are often rendered invisible by the lone author credited for the dissertation. I want to highlight the support of those who helped me on my PhD journey. Specifically, I want to thank my supervisor, Dr. Marshall Beier and my committee members, Dr. Lana Wylie and Dr. Peter Nyers. Your support and knowledge made it clear that academia had room for one more—I felt welcomed by the Political Science department at McMaster University. That is not always the case for scholars pursuing research projects that focus on gender. So, thank you, for viewing International Relations as an expansive and inclusive discipline. I hope that I can one day emulate the support you gave me. There are many others who helped me along my journey—many of you were not involved in Political Science at all, but you always had time to ask me questions about my research. You made me recognize that I could write in a way that appealed to different audiences. You looked over my papers for typos. You consoled me when I felt stressed. You were compassionate. To all those who witnessed me on the high of a research finding, or on the low of a burnout: thank you. iii Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science This dissertation is dedicated to the civilian dead. iv Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................................ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................................................iii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION:WHO COUNTS..................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2: METHODS, METHODOLOGY, AND LITERATURE REVIEW Who Speaks for IR......................................................................................................................................9 Methods: Notes on Interrogating Problems ............................................................................................12 The Public and Private Spheres in Crisis: A Literature Review..............................................................21 CHAPTER 3: PRODUCING THE NOT-CIVILIAN: MILITARY-AGE MALES AS TECHNOCRATIC CATEGORY Introduction..............................................................................................................................................35 The History of Civilian Protection ..........................................................................................................37 Lawfare: Bureaucratic Procedure and the Making of War......................................................................42 At the Center is Gender............................................................................................................................49 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................................53 CHAPTER 4: RISK-MANAGEMENT AND HUMANITARIAN WAR Introduction..............................................................................................................................................55 What War are We Fighting?.....................................................................................................................57 International Relations Comes Home: Expanding the Liberal Project...................................................64 Civilian Death in the Human Terrain......................................................................................................73 CHAPTER 5: LEARNING TO SEE DATA: MILITARY-AGE MALES AND DRONE WARFARE Introduction..............................................................................................................................................89 A Brief History of Signature Strikes ........................................................................................................90 Drowning in Data: How Drone Crews Use Data to Issue Strikes ........................................................104 The Future of Intelligence......................................................................................................................112 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................119 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION: THE FUTURE OF WARFARE..........................................................121 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................128 v Ph.D. Thesis-S. Shoker; McMaster University-Political Science Chapter 1 Introduction: Who Counts? In 2012, The New York Times reported that the Obama Administration excluded all Military-Age Males from the collateral damage count in areas where the U.S engaged in drone warfare (Becker and Shane 2012). Though the Military-Age Male (MAM) category references the draft, the term is applied to all boys and men, including civilians, who are aged sixteen years and older. The Military-Aged Male category is not synonymous with 'combatant,' but marks boys and men for differentiated treatment in conflict zones, to the point where male bodies are used as a shorthand for 'combatant' when assessing the collateral damage count. Though this revelation in The New York Times attracted much short-lived attention, less notice was paid to the Military-Age Male's origins and that this category had also been used extensively during the Bush Administration. The United States often highlights its own superior conduct during wartime, juxtaposing the behavior of norm-violating actors against U.S attempts to protect civilians. The U.S has institutionalized criticism against norm-violating actors through, for example, congressional resolutions condemning militant organizations for their use of civilians as human shields (H.Con. Res 107, 113th Cong. 2014). Pentagon officials have criticized ISIS for forcing civilians to act as human shields (BBC News 2016). Similarly, U.S Central Command (CENTCOM) has criticized Taliban fighters for forcing civilians to remain in villages that were at risk of being bombed by Coalition Forces. While U.S and Afghan military forces were “committed to [protecting the lives of Afghan citizens” the Taliban was “deliberately [placing] civilians in harm's way” (Garamone 2009). Considering these foreign policy stances, the decision made by both the Bush and Obama Administrations to direct military action against civilian boys and men during counterinsurgency operations and then to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Civilian Impact of Drone Strikes
    THE CIVILIAN IMPACT OF DRONES: UNEXAMINED COSTS, UNANSWERED QUESTIONS Acknowledgements This report is the product of a collaboration between the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School and the Center for Civilians in Conflict. At the Columbia Human Rights Clinic, research and authorship includes: Naureen Shah, Acting Director of the Human Rights Clinic and Associate Director of the Counterterrorism and Human Rights Project, Human Rights Institute at Columbia Law School, Rashmi Chopra, J.D. ‘13, Janine Morna, J.D. ‘12, Chantal Grut, L.L.M. ‘12, Emily Howie, L.L.M. ‘12, Daniel Mule, J.D. ‘13, Zoe Hutchinson, L.L.M. ‘12, Max Abbott, J.D. ‘12. Sarah Holewinski, Executive Director of Center for Civilians in Conflict, led staff from the Center in conceptualization of the report, and additional research and writing, including with Golzar Kheiltash, Erin Osterhaus and Lara Berlin. The report was designed by Marla Keenan of Center for Civilians in Conflict. Liz Lucas of Center for Civilians in Conflict led media outreach with Greta Moseson, pro- gram coordinator at the Human Rights Institute at Columbia Law School. The Columbia Human Rights Clinic and the Columbia Human Rights Institute are grateful to the Open Society Foundations and Bullitt Foundation for their financial support of the Institute’s Counterterrorism and Human Rights Project, and to Columbia Law School for its ongoing support. Copyright © 2012 Center for Civilians in Conflict (formerly CIVIC) and Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America. Copies of this report are available for download at: www.civiliansinconflict.org Cover: Shakeel Khan lost his home and members of his family to a drone missile in 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Living Under Drones Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan
    Fall 08 September 2012 Living Under Drones Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic Stanford Law School Global Justice Clinic http://livingunderdrones.org/ NYU School of Law Cover Photo: Roof of the home of Faheem Qureshi, a then 14-year old victim of a January 23, 2009 drone strike (the first during President Obama’s administration), in Zeraki, North Waziristan, Pakistan. Photo supplied by Faheem Qureshi to our research team. Suggested Citation: INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION CLINIC (STANFORD LAW SCHOOL) AND GLOBAL JUSTICE CLINIC (NYU SCHOOL OF LAW), LIVING UNDER DRONES: DEATH, INJURY, AND TRAUMA TO CIVILIANS FROM US DRONE PRACTICES IN PAKISTAN (September, 2012) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I ABOUT THE AUTHORS III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS V INTRODUCTION 1 METHODOLOGY 2 CHALLENGES 4 CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 7 DRONES: AN OVERVIEW 8 DRONES AND TARGETED KILLING AS A RESPONSE TO 9/11 10 PRESIDENT OBAMA’S ESCALATION OF THE DRONE PROGRAM 12 “PERSONALITY STRIKES” AND SO-CALLED “SIGNATURE STRIKES” 12 WHO MAKES THE CALL? 13 PAKISTAN’S DIVIDED ROLE 15 CONFLICT, ARMED NON-STATE GROUPS, AND MILITARY FORCES IN NORTHWEST PAKISTAN 17 UNDERSTANDING THE TARGET: FATA IN CONTEXT 20 PASHTUN CULTURE AND SOCIAL NORMS 22 GOVERNANCE 23 ECONOMY AND HOUSEHOLDS 25 ACCESSING FATA 26 CHAPTER 2: NUMBERS 29 TERMINOLOGY 30 UNDERREPORTING OF CIVILIAN CASUALTIES BY US GOVERNMENT SOURCES 32 CONFLICTING MEDIA REPORTS 35 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the Extent of Presidential Power in Regard to Drone Strikes Kaitlyn Dugas
    Eastern Michigan University DigitalCommons@EMU Senior Honors Theses Honors College 2014 An Analysis of the Extent of Presidential Power in Regard to Drone Strikes Kaitlyn Dugas Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.emich.edu/honors Part of the American Politics Commons Recommended Citation Dugas, Kaitlyn, "An Analysis of the Extent of Presidential Power in Regard to Drone Strikes" (2014). Senior Honors Theses. 392. http://commons.emich.edu/honors/392 This Open Access Senior Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at DigitalCommons@EMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@EMU. For more information, please contact lib- [email protected]. An Analysis of the Extent of Presidential Power in Regard to Drone Strikes Abstract Considerable controversy exists regarding the use of drones by the United States of America in the targeted killings of individuals overseas, including American citizens. The onc stitutionality of such strikes comes into question as well as whether the President even possesses adequate power, whether unitary or granted, to order the strikes against not only American citizens, who are obviously protected by the Constitution, but also foreigners to whom the Constitution may or may not apply. This study will take a look at presidential power from the perspective of each of the three branches of government within the United States and from the viewpoint of International Law in order to understand how much power the President actually has to order targeted killings. This analysis is followed by a case study.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Drone War
    RETHINKING THE DRONE WAR RETHINKING THE DRONE WAR NATIONAL SECURITY, LEGITIMACY, AND CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN U.S. COUNTERTERRORISM OPERATIONS LARRY LEWIS DIANE M. VAVRICHEK A joint publication of CNA and Marine Corps University Press MCUP MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY PRESS Quantico, Virginia 2016 This book represents the best opinion of the authors at the time of printing. The views and opinions are the authors’ own, and do not necessarily represent those of CNA, the Department of the Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, Marine Corps University, or the U.S. government. MCUP MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY PRESS Marine Corps University Press CNA Corporation 111 South Street Arlington, VA 22201 www.usmcu.edu/mcupress www.cna.org 1st printing, 2016 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lewis, Larry L. (Lawrence L.), author. | Vavrichek, Diane, author. Title: Rethinking the drone war : national security, legitimacy, and civilian casualties in U.S. counterterrorism operations / Larry Lewis, Diane Vavrichek. Other titles: National security, legitimacy, and civilian casualties in U.S. counterterrorism operations Description: Quantico, VA : CNA and Marine Corps University Press, [2016] | Includes index. Subjects: LCSH: Drone aircraft--United States--History. | Drone aircraft--Government policy--United States. | Drone aircraft--Moral and ethical aspects--United States. | Uninhabited combat aerial vehicles--Government policy--United States. | Terrorism--Prevention--Government policy--United States. | Targeted killing--Government policy--United
    [Show full text]
  • The Humanitarian Impact of Drones
    THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF DRONES The Humanitarian Impact of Drones 1 THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF DRONES THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF DRONES © 2017 Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom; International Contents Disarmament Institute, Pace University; Article 36. October 2017 The Humanitarian Impact of Drones 1st edition 160 pp 3 Preface Permission is granted for non-commercial reproduction, Cristof Heyns copying, distribution, and transmission of this publication or parts thereof so long as full credit is given to the 6 Introduction organisation and author; the text is not altered, Ray Acheson, Matthew Bolton, transformed, or built upon; and for any reuse or distribution, these terms are made clear to others. and Elizabeth Minor Edited by Ray Acheson, Matthew Bolton, Elizabeth Minor, and Allison Pytlak. Impacts Thank you to all authors for their contributions. 1. Humanitarian Harm This publication is supported in part by a grant from the 15 Foundation Open Society Institute in cooperation with the Jessica Purkiss and Jack Serle Human Rights Initiative of the Open Society Foundations. Cover photography: 24 Country case study: Yemen ©2017 Kristie L. Kulp Taha Yaseen 29 2. Environmental Harm Doug Weir and Elizabeth Minor 35 Country case study: Nigeria Joy Onyesoh 36 3. Psychological Harm Radidja Nemar 48 4. Harm to Global Peace and Security Chris Cole 58 Country case study: Djibouti Ray Acheson 64 Country case study: The Philippines Mitzi Austero and Alfredo Ferrariz Lubang 2 1 THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF DRONES Preface Christof Heyns 68 5. Harm to Governmental It is not difficult to understand the appeal of Transparency Christof Heyns is Professor of Law at the armed drones to those engaged in war and other University of Pretoria.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Unmanned Air, Maritime and Land Platforms by the Australian
    Chapter 2 Background Introduction 2.1 This chapter will provide a background to the inquiry including the increasing use of military unmanned platforms, use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) by the United States (US), the proliferation of UAV capability and ADF use of unmanned platforms. Terminology 2.2 While popularly referred to as 'drones', unmanned platforms are an area of defence technology rich in acronyms and abbreviations. The range of terminology has been increased by a differing focus on the unmanned vehicle/unit itself and the associated systems of communication and control. In particular, the numbers and categories of UAV (also referred to as remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) or unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)) have soared in recent years. For convenience, the term 'unmanned platform' has been used in the committee's report to refer to all complex remotely operated devices and their associated communication and control systems. Unmanned platforms 2.3 Unmanned platforms often have a number of common characteristics. These include the structure of the platform itself, the external control system (such as a ground control station), the communications system which links to the control system, and the payload (which could include sensors or munitions). Automated functions are also often incorporated such as waypoint navigation via GPS. 1 Figure 2.1. Visualisation of UAV communications. 1 Extracted from Alberto Cuadra and Criag Whitlock, 'How drones are controlled', The Washington Post, 20 June 2014. 6 2.4 There are differing views on the first uses of unmanned platforms in a military context.2 Notably, in the 1950s, the Australian Government Aircraft Factory produced advanced 'target drones' (the GAF Jindivik) as part of an agreement with the United Kingdom (UK) for guided missile testing.
    [Show full text]
  • How the United States Use of Double-Tap Drone Strikes Violates IHL Principles of Distinction and Proportionality
    Seton Hall University eRepository @ Seton Hall Law School Student Scholarship Seton Hall Law 2021 Transparency into Darkness: How the United States Use of Double-Tap Drone Strikes Violates IHL Principles of Distinction and Proportionality John Bonino Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bonino, John, "Transparency into Darkness: How the United States Use of Double-Tap Drone Strikes Violates IHL Principles of Distinction and Proportionality" (2021). Law School Student Scholarship. 1125. https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship/1125 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ............................................................................................. 2 II. PRINCIPLE OF DISTINCTION............................................................................................. 4 A. Distinguishing Combatants and Non-combatants ................................................................ 6 i. Medical Personnel ............................................................................................................ 7 ii. Protecting Civilians .......................................................................................................... 9 B. Overcoming the Mens Rea Requirement ........................................................................... 11 III. MILITARY NECESSITY AND THE IHL ......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hezbollah and the Use of Drones As a Weapon of Terrorism
    Hezbollah’s Drones Hezbollah and the Use of Drones as a Weapon of Terrorism By Milton Hoenig The international terrorist group Hezbollah, driven by resistance to Israel, now regularly sends low flying drones into Israeli airspace. These drones are launched and remotely manned from the Hezbollah stronghold in Lebanon and presumably supplied by its patron and strategic partner, Iran. On the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist organizations since 1995, Hezbollah has secured its presence in Lebanon through various phases. It established a strong social services network, and in 2008 it became the dominant political party in the Lebanese government and supported the Assad regime in the Syrian Civil War. Hezbollah’s drone flights into Israeli airspace Hezbollah’s first flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) or drone, into Israeli airspace for reconnaissance purposes occurred in November 2004, catching Israeli intelligence off guard. A Mirsad-1 drone (an updated version of the early Iranian Mohajer drone used for reconnaissance of Iraqi troops during the 1980s Iran-Iraq War), flew south from Lebanon into Israel, hovered over the Western Galilee town of Nahariya for about 20 minutes and then returned to Lebanon before the Israeli air force could intercept it. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah boasted that the Mirsad could reach “anywhere, deep, deep” into Israel with 40 to 50 kilograms of explosives.1 One report at the time was that Iran had supplied Hezbollah with eight such drones, and over two years some 30 Lebanese operatives had
    [Show full text]
  • GUANTANAMO BAY and OMAR KHADR Introduction
    GUANTANAMO BAY AND OMAR KHADR Introduction On July 27, 2002, a U.S. military unit by Osama bin Laden, was responsible Focus on patrol near Khost, in Afghanistan, for the terrorist attacks on New This News in Review story focuses on the stormed a bunker containing a band of York City and Washington, D.C., on case of Omar Khadr, Al Qaeda fighters operating in support September 11, 2001. Khadr’s father, a the young Canadian of Taliban insurgents fighting the NATO native of Egypt, moved the family to who has been held occupation of the country. In the ensuing Afghanistan in the 1990s, where he in the U.S. military firefight and bombing, three insurgents ran a charity organization for orphans. prison in Guantanamo and one American soldier were killed. As He strongly supported the extremist Bay, Cuba, since 2002 the dead and wounded Al Qaeda fighters Taliban regime then ruling the country and the controversy surrounding his were dragged from the bombed-out and was a personal friend of bin Laden. detention there and ruins of their compound, the U.S. troops He encouraged his four sons—Omar, possible release. were astonished to discover that one of Abdurahman, Abdullah and Abdul—to them, a 15-year-old boy, was a Canadian undergo training as jihadists, or Islamic who spoke perfect English. His name holy warriors, against the United States. Did you know . was Omar Khadr, and his subsequent Omar became separated from his father Omar Khadr would have most likely died detention as an alleged “unlawful after the fall of the Taliban during the on the battlefield enemy combatant” in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Counting Drone Strike Deaths
    For more information contact: Naureen Shah, [email protected] Drone strike casualty estimates likely understated New report calls on government to disclose more on drone deaths NEW YORK— The U.S. government should provide an official accounting on who is being killed by drone strikes, said a new report released today by Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Clinic. Counting Drone Strike Deaths is a systematic review of drone strike casualty estimates provided by media and aggregated by three major casualty tracking organizations: The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, Long War Journal, and New America Foundation. These organizations have filled the gaps left by the U.S. government, which refuses to officially provide information on casualties; however, their estimates are incomplete and, in the case of the latter two organizations, significantly undercounted the extent of reported civilian deaths in Pakistan during 2011. “Drone strike casualty estimates are substituting for hard facts and information about the drone program,” said Naureen Shah, Acting Director of the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School. “These are good faith efforts to count civilian deaths, but it’s the U.S. government that owes the public an accounting of who is being killed, especially as it continues expanding secret drone operations in new places around the world.” The report warns that low civilian casualty estimates may provide false assurance to the public and policymakers that drone strikes do not harm civilians. According to the report, despite their strong efforts, two of the tracking organizations, the Long War Journal and New America Foundation, significantly and consistently underestimated the potential number of civilians killed in Pakistan during the year 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of European States in Us Drone Strikes
    DEADLY ASSISTANCE: THE ROLE OF EUROPEAN STATES IN US DRONE STRIKES Amnesty International is a global movement of more than 7 million people who campaign for a world where human rights are enjoyed by all. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards. We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion and are funded mainly by our membership and public donations. © Amnesty International 2018 Cover: Women walk past a graffiti, denouncing strikes by US drones in Yemen, painted Except where otherwise noted, content in this document is licensed on a wall in Sana'a, the capital of Yemen. © REUTERS/Khaled Abdullah under a Creative Commons (attribution, non-commercial, no derivatives, international 4.0) licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode For more information please visit the permissions page on our website: www.amnesty.org Where material is attributed to a copyright owner other than Amnesty International this material is not subject to the Creative Commons licence. First published in 2018 by Amnesty International Ltd Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street, London WC1X 0DW, UK Index: ACT 30/8151/2018 Original language: English amnesty.org CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 METHODOLOGY 10 1. THE US LETHAL DRONE PROGRAMME: A CONTROVERSIAL AND SECRET HISTORY 11 2. THE US LETHAL DRONE PROGRAMME UNDER THE OBAMA AND TRUMP ADMINISTRATIONS 14 3. US DRONE STRIKES UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW 21 4. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON ASSISTANCE 28 5. ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY THE UNITED KINGDOM 36 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Libya's Relentless Militia
    LIBYA’S RELENTLESS MILITIA WAR CIVILIANS HARMED IN THE BATTLE FOR TRIPOLI, APRIL-AUGUST 2019 Amnesty International is a global movement of more than 7 million people who campaign for a world where human rights are enjoyed by all. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards. We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion and are funded mainly by our membership and public donations. © Amnesty International 2019 Except where otherwise noted, content in this document is licensed under a Creative Commons Cover photo: A machine gun mounted on a militia pick up truck destroyed by an LNA strike on a militia (attribution, non-commercial, no derivatives, international 4.0) licence. base adjacent to a field hospital. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode © Amnesty International For more information please visit the permissions page on our website: www.amnesty.org Where material is attributed to a copyright owner other than Amnesty International this material is not subject to the Creative Commons licence. First published in 2019 by Amnesty International Ltd Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW, UK Index: MDE 19/1201/2019 Original language: English amnesty.org CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 4 2. BACKGROUND 5 3. METHODOLOGY 7 4. LNA AIRSTRIKE ON DETENTION CENTRE 8 5. INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS ON RESIDENTIAL AREAS 10 6. CIVILIANS CAUGHT IN RECKLESS STRIKES TARGETING MITIGA AIRPORT 20 7. STRIKES ON MEDICAL FACILITIES 24 8. VIOLATIONS OF THE ARMS EMBARGO 26 9.
    [Show full text]