Collateral damage
A candid history of a peculiar form of death
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9919236 |
|---|---|
| Authors | William H Boothby (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 93 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 209-210 |
| Publication date | 2017-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5850 • E-ISSN: 1468-2346 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ia/iiw014 |
| OpenAlex | W2601046323 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
The aim of this book is to explore where collateral damage fits among the established notions of authority, state and governance, considering along the way the morality of the proportionality rule as such. From an ‘original sin’ starting-point, the concept of collateral damage is seen to have grown from the ambiguity created by human imperfection. The proportionality rule accommodates legal space for imperfect judgements, skills and weapons (p. 7). Rosen describes in stark terms the distinction between terror bombing and collateral damage: victims of the latter are anonymous and unseen. Out of sometimes sweeping language, relevant trends emerge quickly and clearly, such as the increasing centrality of law in targeting. The author puts collateral damage and the associated proportionality rule in a sociological context and sets against these the practical and ambiguous realities of urban warfare. Risk emerges as the critically important feature. Network-centric warfare's decentralized decision-making drives responsibility downwards and, as Rosen argues, by understanding the perspectives of those involved, rich veins of thought can be uncovered. So will human rights law come to the rescue by influencing collateral damage assessment? Analysing the implications of the right to life, the duty to investigate under human rights law is properly presented as a matter that states must consider increasingly pre-deployment. The author must be right that no customary obligation to compensate for collateral damage currently exists and considers whether it might emerge in the future. This reviewer rather doubts it
Ambiguity · Collateral · Collateral damage · Criminology · Duty · Epistemology · Human rights · Imperfect · Law and economics · Morality · Obligation · Political science · Proportionality (law · Sentience · Sociology · Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Philosophy · War, Ethics, and Justification
| Citations per year | 0.56 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2025 (9) |
| Highly cited | No |