DOCSLIB.ORG

Evolution of the Customary International Law on Cultural Property Plundered in War

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evolution of the Customary International Law on Cultural Property Plundered in War Evolution of the Customary International Law on Cultural Property Plundered in War YADONG, ZHANG ZHANG YADONG Abstract: is article presents an unambiguous evolutionary [email protected] sequence of historical events leading to the development of Renmin University of China, China customary international law, seen with reference to the mutual influence and transformation of legal philosophy, practice and codification on plundering cultural property during wars. e Opole Studies in Administration and Law e contemporary legal rules and customs working against Opole University Press, Polonia taking cultural property as spoils of war are rooted in the ISSN: 1731-8297 eighteenth century, and were consistently developed in the ISSN-e: 2658-1922 Periodicity: Trimestral nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Restitution appears the vol. 18, no. 4, 2020 best remedy for the country of origin, especially in the [email protected] condition where the plundered cultural property is existent and Received: 30 November 2020 identifiable. Achieving this goal depends on the cooperation and Accepted: 19 January 2021 coordination throughout the world, based on a wider customary international law space. Keywords: cultural property, plunder of URL: http://portal.amelica.org/ameli/ jatsRepo/463/4632029009/index.html cultural property, customary international law, spoils of war Keywords: cultural property, plunder of cultural property, customary international law, spoils of war. 1. Formation of rules prohibiting looting of cultural property initially in modern international law in Europe Originally, beginning with the Westphalian Peace Treaty (Penna 1997: 258) of 1648, European monarchs started to give up plundering enemies’ cultural property during wars. us, from the mid-17th to the 18th centuries, plundering cultural property across Europe was almost completely abandoned during armed conflicts (Bordwell 1908: 62). Until the end of the 18th century, European states had avoided plundering cultural property in wars on this basis. is was the earliest foundation of modern international law in which European sovereign states took unified action on the protection of cultural property. is practice of determining common regional rules through the form of treaties and implementing them and obeying each other among these European countries, is one of the necessary conditions for customary international law. Technically speaking, if a country is capable of participating in a war and winning, thus this country would never lack in the possibility of plundering the wealth of invaded territory. Even if some countries were too weak to participate in robbery during the war, it was not a common reason for all sovereign states that gave up plundering of cultural property. Naturally, when sovereigns have a strong interest in art and are capable of plundering these treasures, they have no reason to abandon plunder. ird, although the winning countries could plunder cultural properties based on the conventional right to conquer, they give up plundering. Obviously, the giving up looting does not result from the lack of a legal basis. e author believes that abstaining from looting is due to changes in the concepts of the right to conquer, which had been limited by the ideal of justice in war. e changes to the right to conquer are mainly reflected in the areas outlined below. Non-profit publishing model to preserve the academic and open nature of scientific communication PDF generated from XML JATS4R The Opole Studies in Administration and Law, 2020, 18(4), October-December, ISSN: 1731-8297 / 2658... Because of the impact of the Enlightenment thought, since the middle of the 17th century, some leading scholars in the area of international law have initiated in-depth discussions on the restrictions on war and on the right to conquer. Most of these statements link the looting of cultural property with the doctrine of Military Necessity, which determines whether cultural property can be looted, or what kind of property can be looted in war. Pufendorf, for instance, claimed that humanitarian law requires us not to destroy any enemy’s property except in the condition of necessity (1931: 256). Huge Grotius argued that there is no need to use armed force with reference to spheres that are not threatening the army during the war and which provide the spiritual support for society, like temples and church properties (1925: 751). And on the basis of Huge Grotius’s idea, De Vattel proposed to make further restriction on the properties which should not be confiscated, precluding more kinds of cultural property from the scope of the booty (1758: 168). e military necessity doctrine later became a basic principle of the law of war, laying the foundation for the basic legal rules concerning protection of cultural property in the 19th-century wars. As we all know, historically, the tendency of preference and appreciation for works of art and cultural objects, was intensively aroused by the thriving of humanism from the Renaissance era (Biroy 1997-1998: 205-206). is tendency also affected the interest of later jurists when they paid attention to the safeguards of cultural property. According to de Vattel, international law absolutely negated savage and unlimited vandalism of cultural property (1797: 370). Cicero’s remarks, along with De Vettel’s, played a vital role in reversing public legal thoughts and social ideal from plundering of cultural property. Gradually, European countries began to avoid plundering enemy’s artworks and cultural objects, and through the Westphalian Treaty, they established rules to prevent plunder of cultural property during war at the level of international law. Following that, European monarchs complied with the Westphalian Treaty agreements for more than 100 years, thereby overturning the brutal custom of plundering cultural property in wars and establishing new international customary law standards through national practice. Consequently, by the end of the 18th century, rules prohibiting the looting of cultural property were formed regularly in the international law as the status of international custom in wars. 2. Deepening of the forbiddance on the looting of cultural property in the nineteenth century in Europe From 1794 to 1814, the sovereign of France Empire, Napoleon, carried out a well-planned and long- lasting pillage of works of art and cultural relics across the then Europe. (For the details of Napoleon’s confiscation of artistic treasures consult Gould (1965: 31, 34, 48.). His predatory behavior is strictly violated and traitorous for the rules against the plunder of cultural property that had been formulated earlier and generally adhered to by European society. Nevertheless, the author believes that the rules of banning cultural property looting in Europe in those unbearable days, was strengthened, but not weakened, by Napoleon’s action. e reasons are as follows: first of all, Napoleon’s predatory plunder showed that he had clearly understood and recognized that in the scope of legal feasibility, the right to conquer in Europe at that time did not permit to plunder anymore; secondly, the public held a seriously negative attitude to his uncivilized behavior in Europe, which revealed that the degree of civilization in Europe at that time could no longer accept such predation; and finally, the response of other countries proved the existence of the rules against plundering, and further enhanced these rules. Countries insisted, as long as the plundered cultural property was supervised and identifiable, that return of these cultural objects was to be the sole way to remedy. e first main method of looting cultural property by France is secret looting supported by the government. As the monarch, Napoleon secretly dispatched cultural experts with his armed forces to plunder artifacts during the Belgian campaign and kept them secretly (Mainardi 1989: 156). ere was no need to do it in secret if Napoleon thought he had the right to do so. His actions precisely showed that plundering cultural relics and works of art was not an unrecognized area or judged as the right to natural warfare at PDF generated from XML JATS4R ZHANG YADONG. Evolution of the Customary International Law on Cultural Property Plundered in War that time (Mainardi 1989: 156). e second method of looting cultural property by France is by treaty to confiscate it. During the Italian campaign that began in 1796, on conduct of their monarch, Napoleon, France started to transfer the ownership of the looted artwork by signed treaties, for instance, the armistice with the Duke of Modena on 17 May 1796, the treaty with the Duke of Parma on 18 May 1796, the armistice with the Pope’s representative in Bologna on 23 June 1796, and the Treaty of Tolentino with the Pope in February of 1797 (Treue 1961: 149-150). Based on these treaty provisions that infringed the basic principles of the previous law of war, Napoleon more confidently seized artefacts, beautified his plunder, and used treaties to justify the confiscation. ese actions show that Napoleon was well aware of the basic rules of the law of war that no longer allowed the plunder of cultural property. Citizens of defeated states are naturally outraged by their loss of cultural property. Additionally, the robbery by France provoked great rage out of France, which spread widely and fast among groups of artists, art dealers and patrons from all over the world (Treue 1961: 149-150). e exception were the Italian people at that time, who actively protested against Napoleon’s looting, numerous scholars, and even some French troops who stood up against the dealings and asserted that the deed of France and Napoleon was illegal and should be punished. French soldiers also argued that the French government should return all such criminal gains. Despite the force of opposition to such a crime, it would not put an obstacle to the continuous plunder by French troops. Still, it was the first time for the whole society to express their extreme voice of objection to the legitimacy of the plunder by France (Treue 1961: 149-150).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Justice-Seeking and Loot-Seeking in Civil War
    Public Disclosure Authorized Justice-Seeking and Loot-Seeking in Civil War Paul Collier Public Disclosure Authorized The World Bank Anke Hoeffler CSAE, Oxford This Draft: February 17th, 1999 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent. Justice-Seeking and Loot-Seeking in Civil War 1. Introduction Civil war is both a human tragedy and a major impediment to development. Most of the world’s poorest countries are experiencing or have recently experienced such conflict. We use a comprehensive data set to identify its causes. We group potential causes into two categories: the quest for `justice’ and the quest for `loot’. Clearly, one motivation in rebellion is the alleviation of grievances, real or perceived. Most rebellions are ostensibly in pursuit of a `cause’. However, many rebellions also appear to be linked to the capture of resources: diamonds in Angola and Sierra Leone, drugs in Colombia, and timber in Cambodia. In some cases these two motivations become blurred: for example, in Colombia groups which initially claimed ideological motivation have transmuted into drug baronies. In Section 2 we develop a simple rational choice model of loot-motivated rebellion in which private costs are equated with private benefits, and propose empirically measurable proxies for its key variables. In Section 3 we turn to the more complex phenomenon of justice-motivated rebellions, distinguishing between the demand for justice, motivated by a variety of grievances, and the supply of justice determined by both private costs and the difficulties of collective action.
    [Show full text]
  • Erosion of the Rule of Law As a Basis for Command Responsibility Under International Humanitarian Law
    Chicago Journal of International Law Volume 18 Number 2 Article 4 1-1-2018 Erosion of the Rule of Law as a Basis for Command Responsibility under International Humanitarian Law Amy H. McCarthy Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil Recommended Citation McCarthy, Amy H. (2018) "Erosion of the Rule of Law as a Basis for Command Responsibility under International Humanitarian Law," Chicago Journal of International Law: Vol. 18: No. 2, Article 4. Available at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil/vol18/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Erosion of the Rule of Law as a Basis for Command Responsibility under International Humanitarian Law Amy H. McCarthy Abstract Many examples of modern war crimes exhibit a strong link between the institutional breakdown of the rule of law and subsequent commission of humanitarian abuses by service members. Unchecked misconduct, specifically including dehumanizing acts, tends to foster a climate where war crimes are likely to occur. Does the law adequately account for this common thread? This article examines the doctrine of command responsibility in the context of a superior’s failure to maintain discipline among troops, and resulting criminal culpability for violations of the law of armed conflict. While customary international law, as applied by modern ad hoc tribunals, contemplates a wide range of misconduct that may trigger a commander’s affirmative duty to prevent future abuses by subordinates, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States and the International Efforts Against Looting of Antiquities
    Cornell Law Library Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers Faculty Scholarship 2-19-2009 Protecting against Plunder: The nitU ed States and the International Efforts against Looting of Antiquities Asif Efrat Cornell Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clsops_papers Part of the Arts and Entertainment Commons, Commercial Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the International Trade Commons Recommended Citation Efrat, Asif, "Protecting against Plunder: The nitU ed States and the International Efforts against Looting of Antiquities" (2009). Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers. Paper 47. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clsops_papers/47 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Protecting against Plunder The United States and the International Efforts against Looting of Antiquities Asif Efrat ∗∗∗ Word Count: 21,297 Abstract. In 1970 UNESCO adopted a convention intended to stem the flow of looted antiquities from developing countries to collections in art-importing countries. The majority of art-importing countries, including Britain, Germany, and Japan, refused to join the Convention. Contrary to other art-importing countries, and reversing its own traditionally-liberal policy, the United States accepted the international regulation of antiquities and joined the UNESCO Convention. The article seeks to explain why the United States chose to establish controls on antiquities, to the benefit of foreign countries facing archaeological plunder and to the detriment of the US art market.
    [Show full text]
  • War Crimes in the Philippines During WWII Cecilia Gaerlan
    War Crimes in the Philippines during WWII Cecilia Gaerlan When one talks about war crimes in the Pacific, the Rape of Nanking instantly comes to mind.Although Japan signed the 1929 Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, it did not ratify it, partly due to the political turmoil going on in Japan during that time period.1 The massacre of prisoners-of-war and civilians took place all over countries occupied by the Imperial Japanese Army long before the outbreak of WWII using the same methodology of terror and bestiality. The war crimes during WWII in the Philippines described in this paper include those that occurred during the administration of General Masaharu Homma (December 22, 1941, to August 1942) and General Tomoyuki Yamashita (October 8, 1944, to September 3, 1945). Both commanders were executed in the Philippines in 1946. Origins of Methodology After the inauguration of the state of Manchukuo (Manchuria) on March 9, 1932, steps were made to counter the resistance by the Chinese Volunteer Armies that were active in areas around Mukden, Haisheng, and Yingkow.2 After fighting broke in Mukden on August 8, 1932, Imperial Japanese Army Vice Minister of War General Kumiaki Koiso (later convicted as a war criminal) was appointed Chief of Staff of the Kwantung Army (previously Chief of Military Affairs Bureau from January 8, 1930, to February 29, 1932).3 Shortly thereafter, General Koiso issued a directive on the treatment of Chinese troops as well as inhabitants of cities and towns in retaliation for actual or supposed aid rendered to Chinese troops.4 This directive came under the plan for the economic “Co-existence and co-prosperity” of Japan and Manchukuo.5 The two countries would form one economic bloc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unsuspected Francis Lieber
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 5-2018 The Unsuspected Francis Lieber Richard Salomon The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/2622 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] THE UNSUSPECTED FRANCIS LIEBER by RICHARD SALOMON A master’s thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Liberal Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, The City University of New York 2018 © 2018 RICHARD SALOMON All Rights Reserved ii The Unsuspected Francis Lieber by Richard Salomon This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Liberal Studies in satisfaction of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. Date David S. Reynolds Thesis Advisor Date Elizabeth Macaulay-Lewis Executive Officer THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii ABSTRACT The Unsuspected Francis Lieber by Richard Salomon Advisor: Distinguished Professor David S. Reynolds "The Unsuspected Francis Lieber" examines paradoxes in the life and work of Francis Lieber. Lieber is best known as the author of the 1863 "Lieber Code," the War Department's General Order No. 100. It was the first modern statement of the law of armed conflict. This paper questions whether the Lieber Code was truly humanitarian, especially in view of its valorization of military necessity.
    [Show full text]
  • Legacy of Iconoclasm Volume
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by St Andrews Research Repository The Legacy of Iconoclasm: Religious War and the Relic Landscape of Tours, Blois and Vendôme, 1550-1750 Eric Nelson St Andrews Studies in French History and Culture ST ANDREWS STUDIES IN FRENCH HISTORY AND CULTURE The history and historical culture of the French-speaking world is a major field of interest among English-speaking scholars. The purpose of this series is to publish a range of shorter monographs and studies, between 25,000 and 50,000 words long, which illuminate the history of this community of peoples between the later Middle Ages and the late twentieth century. The series covers the full span of historical themes relating to France: from political history, through military/naval, diplomatic, religious, social, financial, gender, cultural and intellectual history, art and architectural history, to historical literary culture. Titles in the series are rigorously peer-reviewed through the editorial board and external assessors, and are published as both e-books and paperbacks. Editorial Board Dr Guy Rowlands, University of St Andrews (Editor-in-Chief) Professor Andrew Pettegree, University of St Andrews Professor Andrew Williams, University of St Andrews Dr David Culpin, University of St Andrews Dr Sarah Easterby-Smith, University of St Andrews Dr David Evans, University of St Andrews Dr Justine Firnhaber-Baker, University of St Andrews Dr Linda Goddard, University of St Andrews Dr Bernhard Struck, University
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Panel II: Humanitarian Law: the Lincoln-Lieber Initiative
    INTRODUCTION TO PANEL II: HUMANITARIAN LAW: THE LINCOLN- LIEBER INITIATIVE George D. Haimbaugh, Jr.* I. LIEBER'S CODE I know of no better way to introduce this panel in honor of Dean Rusk than by referring to a seminal work of Francis Lieber, one of my predecessors on the faculty at the University of South Caro- lina. Lieber's Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field (Instructions),' commonly known as Lieber's Code, was prepared in consultation with a Board of Of- ficers, approved by President Lincoln, and issued by Secretary of War Stanton on April 24, 1863. Fifty years later, Elihu Root, in his presidential address to the seventh annual meeting of the Ameri- can Society of International Law, paid tribute to Lieber and the rules he promulgated.2 In describing the Instructions, Root observed: [W]hile the instrument was a practical presentation of what the laws and usages of war were, and not a technical discussion of what the writer thought they ought to be, in all its parts may be discerned an instinctive selection of the best and most humane practice and an assertion of the control of morals to the limit per- mitted by the dreadful business in which the rules were to be applied." The instinctive selectivity that Root refers to is evidenced by the many instances in which Lieber based his Code articles on what he refers to as the modern law and usages of war.4 Although many *David W." Robinson Professor of Law, University of South Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • Law As a Mean of International Cooperation for the Protection of Cultural Heritage
    Law as a mean of International cooperation for the protection of Cultural Heritage With regards to the Normative Protection of Cultural Property, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was mandated in 1945, right after its creation. Legal measures were taken relatively quickly considering that nine years after its creation, the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the event of Armed Conflicts was adopted after the convocation of an Intergovernmental Conference. The philosophical background of this Convention resides in the preamble, recognizing that “cultural property has suffered grave damage during recent armed conflicts and that, by reason of the developments in the technique of warfare, it is in increasing danger of destruction”. Moreover, the minds behind the Convention addressed the question of Heritage ownership or non-ownership by stating that “damage to cultural property belonging to any people whatsoever means damage to the cultural heritage of all mankind, since each people makes its contribution to the culture of the world”. Whereas the 1954 Convention has obviously been influenced by the atrocities of the war, the 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership adopted fifteen years later and applicable in time of peace reveals the consequences of the War regarding Cultural Heritage. Indeed, the controversies over the misappropriation, restitution and traffic of art that occurred after the WWII urged for the adoption of a new Convention. Regarding the past or ongoing traffic of Culture, the 1954 and 1970 Conventions are often complementary. As it happened during WWII and as it is happening today with the looting of historical sites by non-state actors in Iraq and Syria, the illicit acquisition process in war time, scrutinized under the scope of the Hague Convention, is followed by years of movement out of war zones, thus falling under the scrutiny of the 1970 Convention.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report of the Nazi War Crimes & Japanese
    Nazi War Crimes & Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group Final Report to the United States Congress April 2007 Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group Final Report to the United States Congress Published April 2007 1-880875-30-6 “In a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.” — Albert Camus iv IWG Membership Allen Weinstein, Archivist of the United States, Chair Thomas H. Baer, Public Member Richard Ben-Veniste, Public Member Elizabeth Holtzman, Public Member Historian of the Department of State The Secretary of Defense The Attorney General Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Security Council Director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Nationa5lrchives ~~ \T,I "I, I I I"" April 2007 I am pleased to present to Congress. Ihe AdnllniSlr:lllon, and the Amcncan [JeOplc Ihe Final Report of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Rcrords Interagency Working Group (IWG). The lWG has no\\ successfully completed the work mandated by the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (P.L. 105-246) and the Japanese Imperial Government DisdoSUTC Act (PL 106·567). Over 8.5 million pages of records relaH:d 10 Japanese and Nazi "'ar crimes have been identifIed among Federal Go\emmelll records and opened to the pubhc. including certam types of records nevcr before released. such as CIA operational Iiles. The groundbrcaking release of Lhcse ft:cords In no way threatens lhe Malio,,'s sccurily.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 International Workshop Baggage and Belonging: Military Collections and the British Empire Conveners Henrietta Lidchi
    International Workshop Baggage and Belonging: Military Collections and the British Empire Conveners Henrietta Lidchi (National Museum of World Cultures, Leiden) Biography Prior to working in the Netherlands Henrietta worked at the British Museum and at National Museums Scotland. Her research includes Native American art and material culture looking at collections histories and museum practices of collecting and display, as well as contemporary artistic practices. Since 2017 she has been Principal Investigator on the project Baggage and Belonging: Military Collections and the British Empire (1750-1900) at National Museums Scotland (AH/P006752/1). Her publications include: Surviving Desires: Making and Selling Jewellery in the American Southwest (British Museum/University of Oklahoma Press); Visual Currencies (National Museums Scotland Press); Imagining the Arctic (British Museum/University of Washington Press) and the forthcoming book, co-edited with Stuart Allan Dividing the Spoils: Perspectives on military collections and the British Empire (Manchester University Press). Stuart Allan (National Museums Scotland) Biography Stuart Allan is Keeper of Scottish History & Archaeology at National Museums Scotland. His specialism is in the material and organisational culture of the British Army, and his research focusses on the Scottish military tradition in its wider cultural contexts. He is author of Commando Country (2007), and co-author of Common Cause: Commonwealth Scots and the Great War (2014), and The Thin Red Line: War, Empire and Visions of Scotland (2004). He is currently co- investigator for the Arts and Humanities Research Council project Baggage and Belonging: military collections and the British Empire, 1750-1900 (AH/P006752/1). Nicole Hartwell (National Museums Scotland) Biography Nicole Hartwell is Postdoctoral Researcher at National Museums Scotland working on the Arts and Humanities Research Council project Baggage and Belonging: Military Collections and the British Empire, 1750-1900 (AH/P006752/1).
    [Show full text]
  • High Command Case: a Study in Staff and Command Responsibility
    JOHN JAY DOUGLASS* Colonel, JAGC High Command Case: A Study in Staff and Command Responsibility Less than twenty-five years after the conclusion of the major World War I1war crimes trials, international jurists, historians and the general public are not clear as to, nor are they apparently concerned with, the authority, procedure or even the significant legal decisions of the war crimes trials held both in Europe and the Far East following World War 11.1 Even a mere twenty-five years of experience indicates there will be other trials of those accused of criminal acts in war. Such trials, as well as international lawmakers, should well review the German High Command Trial before the United States Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in October 1948. The lessons of this trial may well be the most important of those from any of the trials held following World War 11. The thrust of this trial and its results relate to the authority of command- ers of military forces for actions of their troops and their personal respon- sibility, as well as the responsibility of staff officers in senior staff positions, for'actions taken by them or carried on under their direction. As a result of recent developments within the United States, arising from the war in Vietnam, it is worthwhile to review the German High Command Trial and to analyze its relationship to the present state of the law. The legal question of criminal responsibility of military commanders and staff officers who do *Commandant (Dean), The Judge Advocate General's School, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Their Additional Protocols International Humanitarian Law April 2011
    Summary of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Their Additional Protocols International Humanitarian Law April 2011 Overview: Protecting the Byzantine Empire and the Lieber Code The Red Cross Vulnerable in War used during the United States Civil War. and International International humanitarian law (IHL) is The development of modern Humanitarian Law a set of rules that seek for humanitarian international humanitarian law is The Red Cross and the Geneva reasons to limit the effects of armed credited to the efforts of 19th century Conventions were born when Henry conflict. IHL protects persons who are Swiss businessman Henry Dunant. In Dunant witnessed the devastating not or who are no longer participating in 1859, Dunant witnessed the aftermath consequences of war at a battlefield hostilities and it restricts the means and in Italy. In the aftermath of that battle, of a bloody battle between French methods of warfare. IHL is also known Dunant argued successfully for the and Austrian armies in Solferino, Italy. as the law of war and the law of armed creation of a civilian relief corps to The departing armies left a battlefield respond to human suffering during conflict. littered with wounded and dying men. conflict, and for rules to set limits on A major part of international Despite Dunant’s valiant efforts to how war is waged. humanitarian law is contained in the mobilize aid for the soldiers, thousands Inspired in part by her work in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 that died. Civil War, Clara Barton would later have been adopted by all nations in found the American Red Cross and In “A Memory of Solferino,” his book also advocate for the U.S.
    [Show full text]