International Humanitarian Law and ““Wars on Terror””

A Comparative Analysis of Israeli and American Doctrines and Policies

Bibliographic Data

ID12017392
AuthorsLisa Hajjar (0000-0002-7566-5598, corresponding author)
Year2006
Volume36
Issue1
Pages21-42
Publication date2006-10-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Palestine Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0377-919X • E-ISSN: 1533-8614
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1525/jps.2006.36.1.21
OpenAlexW2269420660
LanguageEN
Citations received16

The second intifada and the U.S. ““global war on terror,”” though quite different, both involve asymmetrical warfare that pits powerful states against non-state organizations. This article focuses on international humanitarian law (IHL) to assess and compare how Israeli and American doctrines and policies for waging ““wars on terror”” have departed from international consensus on norms and rules for military engagement in occupied territories and the treatment of enemy prisoners. Neither Israel nor the United States ignores IHL; rather, they seek to reinterpret it in a manner that permits the pursuit (militarized or otherwise) of political agendas, even while claiming the reinterpretation to be legally valid

Adversary · Computer security · International humanitarian law · International law · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Reinterpretation · Sociology · State (computer science · War on terror · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub