International Humanitarian Law a Decade after September 11: Developments and Perspectives

  • Dieter Fleck
Part of the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law book series (YIHL, volume 14)


Addressing the challenges 9/11 has posed for international law as a law in transition, the Article reviews the applicability threshold for the principles and rules of international humanitarian law and discusses their relevance in the fight against terrorism. It also considers differences and similarities within the legal paradigms of law enforcement and the conduct of hostilities, comments on the importance of that difference in peacebuilding processes, and underlines the role of civil society in implementing relevant legal obligations. Stressing the need for a discussion on best practices rather than focussing on restrictive interpretations of existing obligations, the author recommends looking at law and policy in context. He underlines the importance of developing a jus post bellum and working on its proper structure, contents and implementation mechanisms as an evolving new legal framework.


Security Council Armed Conflict Geneva Convention Political Advocacy Peace Operation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bothe M (2003) Terrorism and the legality of pre-emptive force. Eur J Int L 14:227Google Scholar
  2. Fleck D (2003) International humanitarian law after September 11: challenges and the need to respond. Yearb Int Humanit L 6:41Google Scholar
  3. Fleck D (2008) Law enforcement and the conduct of hostilities: two supplementing or mutually excluding legal paradigms? In: Fischer-Lescano A, Gasser H-P, Marauhn T, Ronzitti N (eds) Frieden in Freiheit, Peace in liberty. Paix en liberté, Baden–Baden/ZürichGoogle Scholar
  4. Gill TD, Fleck D (eds) (2010) The handbook of the international law of military operations. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. ICRC (2008) How is the term “armed conflict” defined in international humanitarian law?, Opinion paper, March 2008.
  6. ICRC (2011) International humanitarian law and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts, Report to the 31st conference of the red cross and red crescent, Geneva, 28 Nov–1 Dec 2011, 31/C/11/5.1.2Google Scholar
  7. ILA Committee on Non-State Actors (2010) First report of the committee. Report of the Seventy-Fourth Conference, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  8. ILA Committee on the Use of Force (2010) Final report on the meaning of armed conflict in international law. Report of the Seventy-Fourth Conference, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  9. Koh HH, Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (2010) Speech at the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law (ASIL), Washington, DC, 25 Mar 2010.
  10. Lietzau WK (2004) Old laws, new wars: jus ad bellum in an age of terrorism. Max Planck Yearb U.N. Law 8:383Google Scholar
  11. Oswald B (2011) Detention by United Nations peacekeepers: searching for definition and categorisation. J Int Peacekeeping 15 (1–2):119Google Scholar
  12. Pictet JS (ed) (1958) The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Commentary. ICRC, Geneva.Google Scholar
  13. The White House (2002) The national security strategy of the United States of America, Sept 2002.
  14. Wills S (2011) The legal characterization of the armed conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq: implications for protection. Neth Int L Rev 58(2):173Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, and the author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Agreements & Policy, Federal Ministry of DefenceCologneGermany
  2. 2.International Society for Military Law and the Law of WarCologneGermany
  3. 3.Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL)AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations