1 minute read

Rules of War

Enforcement



It is sometimes observed that the phrase rules of war constitutes an oxymoron because the business of war is treachery and chaos while rules and regulations seek to impose order and structure. No permanent and impartial international body has been created to administer the rules of war. Although the United Nations has acted with multinational support in the Korean and Gulf Wars, and the INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE has adjudicated claims against democratic and totalitarian regimes alike, neither body exercises sovereignty over individual member states in any meaningful sense, and powerful countries generally wield more influence over these bodies than do weaker countries.



In most instances it is left to the victorious powers to enforce the rules of war. Following World War II, for example, the Allies prosecuted the Axis powers in Europe and the South Pacific despite the claims of the vanquished that such proceedings amounted to little more than victor's justice or revenge. These claims were not entirely hollow, in that the Allies had committed a variety of war crimes themselves. During the course of the war, for example, the United States interned more than a hundred thousand Americans of Japanese descent simply because of their ancestry and dropped the atomic bomb on two Japanese cities; the British bombed civilian populations in Germany; and the Russians massacred Polish soldiers in the Katyn Forest.

Thus, the current system of international law remains imperfect. Nonetheless, international law attempts to embody the rudiments of human decency, rudiments that are reflected by the customs, practices, and rules of war.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationFree Legal Encyclopedia: Roberts v. United States Jaycees to Secretary of StateRules of War - Origins And Development, War, Terrorism, And Subversion, Prisoners Of War, Soldiers And Civilians