Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
LAW OF WAR and RULES
OF ENGAGEMENT
(ROE)
Values and Ethics Track
Key Points
5 Rules of Engagement
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 61
Introduction
America can take pride in the just manner in which her armed forces operate during
Geneva Conventions
military conflict. Our nations enemies understand that our battlefield conduct and our
treatment of prisoners are humane and tempered. In order to maintain that reputation, a series of agreements
however, future US military leaders must continue to act with integrity and personal first formulated at an
1864 international
courage when conducting combat operations. convention in Geneva,
This chapter summarizes and explains the rules set forth by the Geneva and Switzerland, that
Hague Conventions. All references to the Convention refer to any and all treaties established rules for the
humane treatment of
that derive or result from the Geneva and/or Hague Conventions. The term power prisoners of war, the
refers to a nation, state, or other command authority. sick, and the wounded;
armed forces at sea; and
Adherence to the Rules of Engagement (ROE) helps US forces accomplish their
protecting civiliansthe
missions and avoid violating the Law of War. You have a crucial role to play in this most recent agreement
regard. As a small-unit leader, you are the key to preventing violations of ROE and Law was signed in 1949
of War at the tactical level of conflict.
Hague Conventions
a series of agreements
Abuses at Abu Ghraib negotiated beginning in
Between October and December 2003, at the Abu Ghraib Confinement Facility 1899 that augment the
Geneva Conventions
[Baghdad Central Confinement Facility] (BCCF), numerous incidents of sadistic, and ban certain types of
weaponsthe Geneva
blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted on several detainees. This Protocol, an addendum,
systemic and illegal abuse of detainees was intentionally perpetrated by several bans chemical and
biological weapons
members of the military police guard force (372nd Military Police Company,
320th Military Police Battalion, 800th MP Brigade), in Tier (section) 1-A of the
Abu Ghraib Prison (BCCF). The allegations of abuse were substantiated by
detailed witness statements (ANNEX 26) and the discovery of extremely graphic
photographic evidence. . . . In addition to the aforementioned crimes, there were
also abuses committed by members of the 325th MI Battalion, 205th MI Brigade,
and Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC).
Excerpt from hearing of Article 15-6 investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade
62 SECTION 1
LAWS OF WAR
The laws of war (jus in bello) define the conduct and responsibilities of belligerent nations,
neutral nations, and individuals engaged in warfare, in relation to each other and to protected persons,
usually meaning civilians.
CONTENTS
1. Sources of the laws of war
2. Purposes of the laws
3. Conduct of warfare
4. Declaration of war
5. Violations and applicability
6. Prohibitory effects
7. Remedies for violations
8. See also
9. References
10. External links
To this end, laws of war are intended to mitigate the evils of war by:
Protecting both combatants and noncombatants from unnecessary suffering
Safeguarding certain fundamental human rights of persons who fall into the hands
of the enemy, particularly prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, and civilians
Facilitating the restoration of peace.
Conduct of Warfare
Among other issues, the laws of war address declaration of war, acceptance of surrender, and the treatment
of prisoners of war; the avoidance of atrocities; the prohibition on deliberately attacking civilians; and
the prohibition of certain inhumane weapons. It is a violation of the laws of war to engage in combat
without meeting certain requirements, among them the wearing of a distinctive uniform or other easily
identifiable badge and the carrying of weapons openly. Impersonating Soldiers of the other side by
wearing the enemys uniform and fighting in that uniform, is forbidden, as is the taking of hostages.
Declaration of War
Some treaties, notably the UN charter (1945) Article 2, and some other articles in the charter, seek to
curtail the right of member states to declare war; as does the older and toothless Kellogg-Briand Pact
of 1928 for those nations who ratified it. The Kellogg-Briand Pact was used against Germany for waging
an aggressive war at the Nuremberg War Trials.
Prohibitory Effects
Well-known examples of such laws include the prohibition on attacking doctors or ambulances
displaying a Red Cross, a Red Crescent, or other emblem related to the International Federation of the
Red Cross. It is also prohibited to fire at a person or vehicle bearing a white flag, since that indicates an
intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. In either case, the persons protected by the Red Cross
or white flag are expected to maintain neutrality, and may not engage in warlike acts; in fact, engaging
in war activities under a white flag or red cross is itself a violation of the laws of war.
an unlawful combatant but they must still be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be
deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial, because they are still covered by GC IV Art 5. For example
in 1976 foreign soldiers fighting for FNLA were captured by the MPLA in the civil war that broke out
when Angola gained independence from Portugal in 1975. After a regularly constituted court found
them guilty of being mercenaries, three Britons and an American were shot by a firing squad on July 10,
1976. Nine others were imprisoned for terms of 16 to 30 years.
Spies and terrorists are only protected by the laws of war if the power that holds them is in a state
of armed conflict or war and until they are found to be an unlawful combatant. Depending on the
circumstances, they may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have
been subjected to torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts,
which fall outside their scope. Countries that have signed the UN Convention Against Torture have
committed themselves not to use torture on anyone for any reason.
After a conflict has ended, persons who have committed any breach of the laws of war , and especially
atrocities, may be held individually accountable for war crimes through process of law.
See Also
Just war
Total war
Law of land warfare
International law
International Humanitarian Law.
References
Documents on the Laws of War (/http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Law/
InternationalLaw/?view=usa&sf=toc&ci=0198763905/), (Third Edition) Ed. by Adam Roberts and
Richard Guelff, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0198763905
External Links
UN Charter (/http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter//)
A Brief History of the Laws of War (/http://www.globalissuesgroup.com/geneva/history.html/)
Crimes, Trials and Laws (/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/trials.htm/)
Trial of Otto Skorzeny and Others, General Military Government Court of the U.S. Zone of Germany,
18th August to 9th September, 1947 (/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/WCC/skorzeny.htm/)
1976: Death Sentence for Mercenaries (/http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/
june/28/newsid_2520000/2520575.stm/) (source BBC)
Overview
jus ad bellum
Among other issues, the Law of War addresses declaration of war; acceptance of surrender;
the treatment of prisoners of war; the avoidance of atrocities; the prohibition on deliberately the condition under
which one may resort
attacking civilians; and the prohibition of certain inhumane weapons. It is a violation of to war or use of force
the Law of War to engage in combat without meeting certain requirementssuch as wearing
a distinctive uniform or other easily identifiable badge and openly carrying weapons.
Impersonating Soldiers of the other side by wearing the enemys uniform and fighting in
that uniform is forbidden, as is the taking of hostages.
The Armed Forces of the United States follow the Law of War because it:
Prisoners of War
In war, the enemy population is divided into two general classes:
1. Persons entitled to treatment as prisoners of war upon capture, as defined in
prisoner of war
Article 4, GPW
one who, while engaged 2. The civilian population (excluding civilians listed in GPW, Art. 4), who benefit to
in combat under orders
of his or her
varying degrees from the provisions of the Geneva Convention.
government, is captured Persons in both these categories have distinct rights, duties, and responsibilities. Persons
by the armed forces of who are not members of the armed forces, as defined in GPW, Art. 4, but who bear arms
the enemy
or engage in other conduct hostile to the enemy deprive themselves of many of the privileges
granted to the civilian population.
e
technique for handling
prisoners: Search,
Silence, Segregate,
Safeguard, and Speed
to the Rear. Critical Thinking
Examine the possible motivations for violating the Law of War in taking property.
Why is this especially forbidden? How would you prevent or report a violation
of the Law of War during a mission?
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 69
supplies, or because it appears certain that they will be set free through the impending success
of their forces. A commander may not kill prisoners on grounds of self-preservation, even in
the case of airborne or commando operations. The circumstances of the operation, however,
may make it necessary to rigorously supervise prisoners of war and restrain their movements.
Information Requirements
The commander of any unit who obtains information about a reportable incident must
immediately report the incident through command channels to higher authority. Make
the report by the fastest means available.
noncombatant
Preventing Violations and War Crimes
You should take the following measures to protect noncombatants, civilians, and civilian
an individual in an area
of combat operations property from the consequences of combat:
who is not armed and is
not participating in any
activity in support of any Protect Noncombatants, Civilians, and Civilian Property
of the factions or forces
involved in combat Make minimizing collateral damage a key factor in deciding what to target
Do not treat several military targets located in a civilian area as one large target
Prevent attacks on unlawful targets
Know and respect symbols for protected persons and property
Do not attack noncombatants or protected property
Do not fire indiscriminately; take well-aimed shots
Use observed fires
Follow the Rules of Engagement
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 71
Use illumination rounds for harassment and interdiction (H&I) fires instead of
high explosive rounds
Conduct a risk assessment and consider the military value to the enemy before
targeting any building.
e
Critical Thinking
Whom does the Law of War protect? Evaluate whether the Law of War
is equal parts legal and moral in application.
Rules of Engagement
90 minutes earlier and had stopped other vehicles. They knew a high-level
embassy official would be moving to the airport on that road, and their aim was
to support this movement.
But no specific coordination occurred between those involved in Sgrenas
rescue and the military unit responsible for the checkpoint, according to the
source, who said he cannot be named because the militarys investigation into the
incident is continuing.
Soldiers at the checkpoint have told US military officers that they flashed
lights, used hand signals and fired warning shots in an effort to stop the car,
which they believed was traveling at more than 50 mph, a typical speed for that
road. But Sgrena, who had just been released by Iraqi captors, recalled later that
the car was not traveling very fast and that Soldiers started firing right after
lighting a spotlighta decision she said was not justified. Sgrena was wounded
by shrapnel in the US barrage.
The absence of advance communication between the Italians and the US
Soldiers at the checkpoint appears to have put the occupants of the car in grave
jeopardy, given what many US officials describe as the militarys standard practice
of firing at onrushing cars from their checkpoints in Iraq.
In my view, the main contributing factor was a lack of prior coordination with
the ground unit, the source said. If requested, we would have resourced and
supported this mission very differently.
Military officials in Iraq have said for two days that they cannot answer
questions about US rules of engagement because of a need to keep insurgents off
guard. Officials have not said whether these rules have changed since the
insurgency in Iraq worsened in late 2003. They also have declined to estimate
how many civilians such as Calipari have been killed accidentally by US forcesat
checkpoints or elsewhere in Iraq.
Washington Post
International Law and Concerns: What international law applies to the situation?
What international political or economic factors must be taken into account? What
about countries bordering on the area of conflict?
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 73
US National Security Policy and Politics: What does US national security require?
What domestic political considerations must policymakers factor in?
Domestic Law or Concerns: Which US laws apply? What other implications exist
for American society?
Operational Concerns: Which operational challenges confront commanders? These
might include the nature of the enemy; the presence of neutrals; the need to
safeguard significant buildings, cities, or individuals; the local culture; local ethnic
or religious conflicts; weather; terrain; or the makeup and conduct of allied forces.
ROE always recognize the right of self-defense, the commanders obligation to protect
personnel, and the national right to defend US forces, allies, and coalition members against
attack. The Joint Chiefs of Staff standing rules of engagement (SROE) provide baseline As a leader, you will
guidance (see CJCSI 3121.01A). Commanders then tailor and supplement the SROE to be responsible for
applying the ROE
meet their needs for specific operations. Effective ROE are enforceable, understandable, and determining the
tactically sound, and legally sufficient. Further, effective ROE support the mission and appropriate level of force
permit subordinate commanders to exercise initiative when they confront an opportunity for a given situation.
or unforeseen circumstances.
e
Critical Thinking
Explain the difference between the Law of War and Rules of Engagement.
74 SECTION 1
In all operations, ROE may impose political, practical, operational, and legal limitations
upon commandersregardless of whether they employ lethal or nonlethal force.
In all situations, Soldiers Commanders factor these constraints into planning and preparation as early as possible.
and commanders use Decisions not to use particular classes of weapons or to exempt the territory of certain
the degree of force that
is militarily necessary,
nations from attack are examples of such limitations. Tactically, ROE may extend to rules
proportional to the for initiating engagements with certain weapons systems (for example, unobserved fires)
threat, and prudent or reacting to an attack. ROE never justify illegal actions. In all situations, Soldiers and
for future operations. commanders use the degree of force that is militarily necessary, proportional to the threat,
and prudent for future operations.
Two important principles lie behind ROE. Soldiers responses to a threat must be both:
1. Necessary. Necessity exists when a hostile act occurs or when a force or terrorist(s)
Sticks and Stones.
The proportional
exhibits hostile intent. The actions of the Soldier in response to a real or perceived
response for a child threat must be necessary to prevent the loss of life, limb, or eyesight to himself or
throwing rocks at his fellow Soldier or to prevent damage or destruction of US property.
US forces might be to
halt and question the 2. Proportional. Force used to counter a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent
youth. It would not be must be reasonable in intensity, duration, and magnitude to the perceived or
acceptable to retaliate demonstrated threat based on all facts the commander knows at the time. Soldiers
with lethal force.
must use no more than the required amount of force to counter a real or perceived
threat. The threat response must be relative to the threat itself.
NOTE: The ROE can change several times during a single deployment. You must
always thoroughly brief your Soldiers on any changes to ROE. Well-trained and
disciplined Soldiers will be able to adapt to changing conditions.
ROE do not assign specific tasks or require specific tactical solutions. They allow
commanders to quickly and clearly convey to subordinates a desired posture regarding the
use of force. In passing orders to subordinates, commanders act within the ROE received.
ROE never relieve commanders, however, from the responsibility to formulate an
operational design. The end state, objectives, and mission must be clear. Commanders at
all levels continually review the ROE to ensure their effectiveness in light of current and
projected conditions. Soldiers who thoroughly understand ROE are better prepared to
apply the proper balance of initiative and restraint.
Hostile Force
Exercising the right of national self-defense and declaring a force hostile is a heavy
hostile force
responsibility. Policy-makers much weigh all available intelligence, the status of international
any civilian, paramilitary, relationships, the requirements of international law, an appreciation of the political
or military force or situation, and the potential consequences for the United States. The exercise of the right
terrorist(s), with or and obligation of national self-defense by competent authority is separate from and in
without national
designation, that has no way limits a commanders right and obligation to exercise unit self-defense. Once a
committed a hostile act, force is declared hostile by appropriate authority, US units need not observe a hostile act
exhibited hostile intent, or a demonstration of hostile intent before engaging that force.
or has been declared
hostile by appropriate
US authority
e
Critical Thinking
Evaluate how Army Values might influence ROE. Why might ROE change,
depending on the situation?
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 75
e
Critical Thinking
Describe the meaning of this statement on a large scale and on a personal scale:
A Soldiers response to a threat must be both necessary and proportional.
76 SECTION 1
e
CONCLUSION
The Law of War protects both innocent civilians and military forces from
inhumane methods of warfare. It provides a firm moral and legal foundation for
conducting US military action. Army leaders at all levels have the legal and moral
obligation not only to adhere to the Law of War but to report its violations. As a
leader, you must instill the same sense of duty and obligation in your Soldiers.
When threatened by enemies who often adopt asymmetric tactics in an
attempt to defeat US forces, the worst response for you under these conditions
would be to retaliate indiscriminately and contrary to the restrictions imposed
by the ROE and the Law of War. To abandon the values and beliefs that the US
military and American society hold dear would be to hand victory to the enemy.
Learning Assessment
1. Describe the actions that prevent Law of War violations and war crimes.
2. Explain the key elements of the Hague and Geneva Conventions that pertain
to small-unit combat operations.
3. Explain the process to report violations when they occur.
4. Explain the relationship between Rules of Engagement and the Law of War.
5. Explain how ROE prevent engagement of unlawful targets and the excessive
use of force.
Key Words
Geneva Conventions
Hague Conventions
Law of War
jus in bello
jus ad bellum
prisoner of war (POW)
noncombatant
Rules of Engagement
hostile force
hostile act
hostile intent
Law of War and Rules of Engagement (ROE) 77
References
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3121.01A. Appendix A. Standing Rules
of Engagement for US Forces. 15 January 2000. Retrieved 8 May 2008 from
http://www.fas.org/man/dod- 101/dod/docs/cjcs_sroe.pdf
DoDD 2311.01E, DoD Law of War Program. 9 May 2006.
Field Manual 1-02, Operational Terms and Graphics. 21 September 2004.
Field Manual 3-0, Operations. 14 June 2001.
Field Manual 27-10, The Law of Land Warfare. 15 July 1976.
Smith, R. J., & Tyson, A. S. (2005, March 7). Shootings by US at Iraq Checkpoints
Questioned. The Washington Post, p. A01.
Taguba, A. (2004). Article 15-6 Investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade.
Retrieved 12 May 2005 from http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/iraq/taqubarpt.html
#FNopinion/./