Project Goals:

As we struggle with the challenges posed by non-state actor participation in armed conflict it’s important to keep in mind who we hope to influence and the best way to do that.  We have touched upon a number of ideas over the past two years, but not in a sustained way.  Some have suggested that drafting a new protocol might be necessary in light of the current law’s insufficiencies. Some are more inclined to argue for a more modest reinterpretation of the laws of war – i.e. one more in synch with today’s realities.  Perhaps we should propose draft principles -i.e., the adoption of the Princeton principles on universal jurisdiction: http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/01/q3/0723-principles.htm.  You are invited to share your thoughts on these suggestions or to offer one of your own.  

Publication:

As we move forward in publishing our work to date we will be sure to steer our efforts according to the overarching objectives under consideration above. In the meantime, considering that this is the first of what will become a series of NB/OL publications, we might work toward addressing the full spectrum of issues presented by non-state actors participating in armed conflicts. We have five foundation pieces from the Sept 10 workshop in Herzylia and are interested in your views regarding how to arrange and supplement this work.

 

Our publication might be organized around the following two themes, which roughly correlate with the panel structure at the Sept 10 workshop: (1) uncertainties in the legal framework that clarify the nature of the conflict for purposes of determining whether criminal law or the laws of armed conflict apply and, thereafter, which detention and prosecutorial systems are appropriate; and (2) issues related to the status of individual participants and how that status affects military operations. If we continue in this vein, we will need to draft a list of topics to be addressed in order to provide a comprehensive overview of the issues and experts to invite to fill in the identified gaps.

 

We are eager to have your feedback on this proposed plan and any recommendations regarding topics and experts. We are also open to considering alternative approaches.