Geneva Conventions

The latter led to the 1864 Geneva Convention, the first codified international treaty that covered the sick and wounded soldiers on the battlefield.

Representatives of 12 states and kingdoms signed the convention:[6][7] For both of these accomplishments, Henry Dunant became co recipient of the first Nobel Peace Prize in 1901.

With the 'Additional Articles relating to the Condition of the Wounded in War' an attempt was initiated to clarify some rules of the 1864 convention and to extend them to maritime warfare.

[24] The Geneva Conventions are rules that apply only in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities.

"[41] The International Committee of the Red Cross has explained that this language describes non-international armed conflict (NIAC) "where at least one Party is not a State.

When the provisions of this article apply, it states that:[45] Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: During the negotiation of the Geneva Conventions, France and Britain were initially staunchly opposed to Common Article 3.

However, to save face during negotiations and make strategic concessions, France and Britain deliberately introduced ambiguous language in the text of Common Article 3 that made it easy for states to avoid the obligations of the rule.

[46] As a consequence, Common Article 3 only concerns with humane treatment and does not deal with methods and means of hostilities,[47] such as bombings committed by non-state armed groups or state forces against civilian targets in the Algerian War and the Troubles.

"[48] The Supreme Court of the United States invalidated the Bush Administration view of Common Article 3, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, by ruling that Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions applies to detainees in the "War on Terror", and that the Guantanamo military commission process used to try these suspects was in violation of U.S. and international law.

[49] In response to Hamdan, Congress passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which President Bush signed into law on 17 October 2006.

"[50] "... Common Article 3 continues the conventional practice (reflected in both the 'Lieber' and 'The Hague' provisions) of according humanitarian protections only to 'belligerents' who defer to the laws and customs of war: not to 'insurrectionists' who defy these norms from the very outset of hostilities.

Once the new Karzai administration was established and recognized internationally, the conflict changed from an IAC to a NIAC, with NATO troops under International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Resolute Support Mission (RSM) auspices assisting the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan with its consent in battling Taliban insurgents.

[52] In contrast, the Soviet–Afghan War was an IAC because the Soviet Union invaded the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) to remove Afghan communist leader Hafizullah Amin from power, then installed puppet leader Babrak Karmal, who "invited" Soviet troops to intervene against the Afghan mujahideen fighters.

According to article 43 of the 1949 Conventions, soldiers are employed for the purpose of serving in war; engaging in armed conflict is legitimate, and does not constitute a grave breach.

[62] Should a soldier be arrested by belligerent forces, they are to be considered "lawful combatants" and afforded the protectorate status of a prisoner of war (POW) until the cessation of the conflict.

[64] Charges may only be brought against an enemy POW after a fair trial, but the initial crime being accused must be an explicit violation of the accords, more severe than simply fighting against the captor in battle.

[64] Although warfare has changed dramatically since the Geneva Conventions of 1949, they are still considered the cornerstone of contemporary international humanitarian law.

[dubious – discuss] The lines between combatants and civilians have blurred when the actors are not exclusively High Contracting Parties (HCP).

Controversy has arisen over the US designation of irregular opponents as "unlawful enemy combatants" (see also unlawful combatant), especially in the Supreme Court of the United States judgments over the Guantanamo Bay detention camp brig facility Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and Rasul v. Bush,[72] and later Boumediene v. Bush.

President George W. Bush, aided by Attorneys-General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales and General Keith B. Alexander, claimed the power, as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, to determine that any person, including an American citizen, who is suspected of being a member, agent, or associate of Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or possibly any other terrorist organization, is an "enemy combatant" who can be detained in U.S. military custody until hostilities end, pursuant to the international law of war.

[73][74][75] The application of the Geneva Conventions in the Russo-Ukrainian War (2014–present) has been troublesome[vague] because some of the personnel who engaged in combat against the Ukrainians were not identified by insignia, although they did wear military-style fatigues.

[80] Artificial intelligence and autonomous weapon systems, such as military robots and cyber-weapons, are creating challenges in the creation, interpretation and application of the laws of armed conflict.

[81][82] Adding to this challenge is the very slow speed of the procedure of developing new treaties to deal with new forms of warfare, and determining agreed-upon interpretations to existing ones, meaning that by the time a decision can be made, armed conflict may have already evolved in a way that makes the changes obsolete.

[83] Tilman Rodenhäuser and Mauro Vignati, advisors on legal issues and digital technology at the ICRC, have since proposed rules of engagement for civilian hackers in 2023.