Restraint (military)

Last updated

Restraint in the military or armed groups, during war or insurgency, refers to "behaviour that indicates deliberate actions to limit the use of violence" with the aim of upholding the modern and professional principles of war, humanitarian rights, and minimizing political and military repercussions. [1] [2]

Contents

Background

In the 17th century Hugo Grotius attempted to frame laws to act as a restraint on violence during war. However rather than law, fear of retaliation or pragmatism have had more impact. [3]

Throughout the Christian world I observed a lack of restraint in relation to war, such as even barbarous races should be ashamed of; I observed that men rush to arms for slight causes, or no cause at all, and that when arms have once been taken up there is no longer any respect for law, divine or human; it is as if, in accordance with a general decree, frenzy had openly been let loose for the committing of all crimes.

— Hugo Grotius, De jure belli ac pacis (The Law of War and Peace), trans. Francis Kelsey (Carnegie edition, 1925), Prol. sect. 28. [4]

Modern codification of restraints with regard to weapons and actions during war at an international level includes the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the 1929 Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field and the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 1950. [5] In 1977 Howard S. Levie says that a problem with the area of combat restraints is that "The problem in this area, as in many other areas, is not lack of law, it is lack of compliance with the law." [5] More recently, the United States Armed Forces Principles of Joint Operations lists 12 principles of which "restraint" is one. [2] Restraint became a part of the principles for the US military as early as 1990 when it was added to the principles of military operations other than war. [6]

Restraints on war arise from both political and military policies. [7] Connections between both these forms of policies can help increase the overall restraint. [7] This may refer to military-strategic restraint, say through disconnected military planning and inadequate political direction; [8] restraint from killing a non-combatant even at the expenses of incurring greater military casualties; [9] [10] restraint from excessive or disproportionate violence, use of indiscriminate weaponry, sexual violence, destruction of health infrastructure; [1] restraint during reprisals and retaliation. [5] Socialization and indoctrination of this restraint may be through training, hierarchy, doctrine, rules of engagement, constitutional law and force. [11] [12] The Australian Army's Royal Military College in Duntroon tests ethical compliance under extreme fatigue and stress, which in turn helps inculcate restraint under duress in real world situations. [11] Analysing patterns of violence and restraint help identify violence that is ordered as compared to excessive violence despite no orders for the same. [13] It would also help to identity causes of escalation and de-escalation. [9] Over time, the number of situations in which restraint is expected has increased. [1] Analysing periods of restraint as compared to violence can help identify the motivations behind restraint and in turn guide policy to predicting and controlling the violence. [14] Lack of restraint can cause a massacre, unrestrained war, unlimited war or total war. [15] [16]

From February 2010, ISAF in Afghanistan followed a policy of 'courageous restraint' during Operation Enduring Freedom. The policy advocated nonlethal force against non-combatants even in the most difficult of situations. [10]

Scholars and other commentators have labelled India's approach to retaliation, military strategy and other geo-political issues as 'strategic restraint'. [17] [18] However others argue against this label or signal a shift from it in recent years. [19] [20] [21]

Scholar James Ron put forward the idea of 'savage restraint' following a study of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. [22]

During the Palestinian uprising, Israeli troops used substantial violence to suppress Palestinian resistance to military occupation. At the same time, however, soldiers sought to maintain an aura of legality, limiting much of their violence to non-lethal, police-like methods, distorted though they were. Political and military elites knew the mission was to suppress the rebellion as quickly as possible, while simultaneously limiting Palestinian fatalities. [...] prompted Israeli leaders and their troops to develop innovative methods of non-lethal punishment which promoted Palestinian suffering, while avoiding overly blatant violations of formal procedure. Israeli army regulations governing the use of force were, thus, both constraining and enabling, limiting the intensity of violence, while permitting non-lethal distortion and elaboration. I termed the resulting repertoire of violence "savage restraint".

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gaza Strip</span> Self-governing Palestinian territory next to Egypt and Israel

The Gaza Strip, or simply Gaza, is a polity and the smaller of the two Palestinian territories. On the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea, Gaza is bordered by Egypt on the southwest and Israel on the east and north.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hamas</span> Palestinian political and military organization

Hamas, an acronym of its official name, Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya, is a Palestinian Sunni Islamist political and military movement governing parts of the Israeli-occupied Gaza Strip.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zionist political violence</span> Violence or terrorism motivated by Zionism

Zionist political violence refers to politically motivated violence or terrorism perpetrated by Zionists. The term is used to describe violence committed by those who support the political movement of Zionism, and violence committed against opponents of Zionism. The violence often takes the form of terrorist attacks and has been directed against both Jewish and Arab targets. The most active period of most notable Zionist political violence began on June 30, 1924, through the 1940s, and continues to the present day, usually for the purpose of expanding Zionist settlements in Mandatory Palestine.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hugo Grotius</span> Dutch philosopher and jurist (1583–1645)

Hugo Grotius, also known as Hugo de Groot or Huig de Groot, was a Dutch humanist, diplomat, lawyer, theologian, jurist, statesman, poet and playwright. A teenage prodigy, he was born in Delft and studied at Leiden University. He was imprisoned in Loevestein Castle for his involvement in the controversies over religious policy of the Dutch Republic, but escaped hidden in a chest of books that was transported to Gorinchem. Grotius wrote most of his major works in exile in France.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Intifada</span> 1987–1993 Palestinian uprising against Israel

The First Intifada, also known as the First Palestinian Intifada or the Stone Intifada, was a sustained series of protests, acts of civil disobedience and riots carried out by Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and Israel. It was motivated by collective Palestinian frustration over Israel's military occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as it approached a twenty-year mark, having begun in the wake of the 1967 Arab–Israeli War. The uprising lasted from December 1987 until the Madrid Conference of 1991, though some date its conclusion to 1993, with the signing of the Oslo Accords.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Intifada</span> 2000–2005 Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation

The Second Intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, was a major uprising by Palestinians against the Israeli occupation, characterized by a period of heightened violence in the Palestinian territories and Israel between 2000 and 2005. The general triggers for the unrest are speculated to have been centered on the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit, which was expected to reach a final agreement on the Israeli–Palestinian peace process in July 2000. An uptick in violent incidents started in September 2000, after Israeli politician Ariel Sharon made a provocative visit to the Al-Aqsa compound, which is situated atop the Temple Mount in East Jerusalem; the visit itself was peaceful, but, as anticipated, sparked protests and riots that Israeli police put down with rubber bullets, live ammunition, and tear gas. Within the first few days of the uprising, the IDF had fired one million rounds of ammunition.

A civilian is a person not a member of an armed force nor a person engaged in hostilities.

A preemptive war is a war that is commenced in an attempt to repel or defeat a perceived imminent offensive or invasion, or to gain a strategic advantage in an impending war shortly before that attack materializes. It is a war that preemptively 'breaks the peace' before an impending attack occurs.

International humanitarian law (IHL), also referred to as the laws of armed conflict, is the law that regulates the conduct of war. It is a branch of international law that seeks to limit the effects of armed conflict by protecting persons who are not participating in hostilities and by restricting and regulating the means and methods of warfare available to combatants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fatah–Hamas conflict</span> Palestinian factional conflict since 2006

The Fatah–Hamas conflict is an ongoing political and strategic conflict between Fatah and Hamas, the two main Palestinian political parties in the Palestinian territories, leading to the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip in June 2007. The reconciliation process and unification of Hamas and Fatah administrations remains unfinalized and the situation is deemed a frozen conflict.

Targeted killing, or assassination is a tactic that the government of Israel has used during the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, and other conflicts.

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal on one of two bases: that they are in violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, or that they are in breach of international declarations. The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the Israeli-occupied territories.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">China–Palestine relations</span> Bilateral relations

China–Palestine relations, also referred to as Sino–Palestinian relations, encompasses the long bilateral relationship between China and Palestine dating back from the early years of the Cold War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Targeted killing</span> Extrajudicial assassination by governments

Targeted killing is a form of assassination carried out by governments outside a judicial procedure or a battlefield.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lethal autonomous weapon</span> Autonomous military technology system

Lethal autonomous weapons (LAWs) are a type of autonomous military system that can independently search for and engage targets based on programmed constraints and descriptions. LAWs are also known as lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS), autonomous weapon systems (AWS), robotic weapons or killer robots. LAWs may operate in the air, on land, on water, underwater, or in space. The autonomy of current systems as of 2018 was restricted in the sense that a human gives the final command to attack—though there are exceptions with certain "defensive" systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Palestinian stone-throwing</span> Palestinian practice of throwing stones at people or property

Palestinian stone-throwing refers to a Palestinian practice of throwing stones at people or property. It is a tactic with both a symbolic and military dimension when used against heavily-armed troops. Proponents, sympathizers, as well as analysts have characterized stone throwing by Palestinians as a form of "limited", "restrained", "non-lethal" violence. The majority of Palestinian youths engaged in the practice appear to regard it as symbolic and non-violent, given the disparity in power and equipment between the Israeli forces and the Palestinian stone-throwers, with many considering it a method of deterring Israeli military forces and civilians from the occupation of Palestinian lands. The state of Israel considers the act to be criminal, on the grounds that it is potentially lethal. In some cases, Israelis have argued that it should be treated as a form of terrorism, or that, in terms of the psychology of those who hurl stones, even in defense or in protest, it is intrinsically aggressive.

Black Sunday, 1937 refers to a series of acts undertaken by Jewish militants of the Irgun faction against Arab civilians on 14 November 1937. It was among the first challenges to the Havlagah policy not to retaliate against Arab attacks on Jewish civilians.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Israeli occupation of the West Bank</span> Military occupation by Israel (1967–)

The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, has been under military occupation by Israel since 7 June 1967, when Israeli forces captured the territory, then ruled by Jordan, during the Six-Day War. The status of the West Bank as a militarily occupied territory has been affirmed by the International Court of Justice and, with the exception of East Jerusalem, by the Israeli Supreme Court. The official view of the Israeli government is that the laws of belligerent occupation do not apply to the territories, which it considers instead "disputed", and it administers the West Bank, excepting East Jerusalem, under the Israeli Civil Administration, a branch of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. Considered to be a classic example of an "intractable conflict", the length of Israel's occupation was already regarded as exceptional after two decades, and is now the longest in modern history. Israel has cited several reasons for retaining the West Bank within its ambit: a claim based on the notion of historic rights to this as a homeland as claimed in the Balfour Declaration of 1917; security grounds, both internal and external; and the deep symbolic value for Jews of the area occupied.

In international humanitarian law and international criminal law, an indiscriminate attack is a military attack that fails to distinguish between legitimate military targets and protected persons. Indiscriminate attacks strike both legitimate military and protected objects alike, thus violating the principle of distinction between combatants and protected civilians. They differ from direct attacks against protected civilians and encompass cases in which the perpetrators are indifferent as to the nature of the target, cases in which the perpetrators use tactics or weapons that are inherently indiscriminate, and cases in which the attack is disproportionate, because it is likely to cause excessive protected civilian casualties and damages to protected objects.

References

  1. 1 2 3 ICRC 2018, p. 18.
  2. 1 2 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (11 August 2011). Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations (PDF). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. pp. A–1 – A–4. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 22 June 2021.
  3. ↑ White 2007, p. 17.
  4. ↑ Moore, Wendy. "Hugo Grotius: Later Career (Timeline of Huig de Groot, known as Hugo Grotius)". libguides.law.uga.edu. Retrieved 2021-06-26.
  5. 1 2 3 Levie, Howard S. (1977). "Combat Restraints". Naval War College Review. 29 (3): 61–69. ISSN   0028-1484. JSTOR   44641720.
  6. ↑ Mallick, P K (2009). "Principles of War: Time for Relook" (PDF). Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS), New Delhi. Manekshaw Paper No. 12. Retrieved 22 June 2021.
  7. 1 2 O'Brien, William V. (1981). "Normative and Policy Restraints on War". Michigan Law Review. 79 (4). Reviewed Works: Restraints on War: Studies in the Limitation of Armed Conflict edited by Michael Howard; Humanitarian Politics: The International Committee of the Red Cross by David P. Forsythe.: 991–1009. doi:10.2307/1288329. ISSN   0026-2234. JSTOR   1288329.
  8. ↑ Dasgupta, Sunil (10 April 2010). "The Fate of India's Strategic Restraint". Brookings. Retrieved 2021-06-21. [...] the disconnect between strategic purpose and military planning is both shaped by and reinforces military-strategic restraint in India's foreign policy [...]
  9. 1 2 ICRC 2018, p. 19.
  10. 1 2 Joseph Federici; Melissa Dalton (30 November 2017). "Operational Security, Accountability, and Civilian Casualties". Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved 2021-06-19.
  11. 1 2 ICRC 2018, p. 29.
  12. ↑ ICRC 2018, p. 25.
  13. ↑ ICRC 2018, p. 21.
  14. ↑ ICRC 2018, p. 20.
  15. ↑ Green 2018, p. 1-3.
  16. ↑ White 2007, p. 19, 23.
  17. ↑ Ganguly, Sumit; Kapur, S. Paul (2019-06-18). "The Myth of Indian Strategic Restraint". The National Interest. Retrieved 2021-06-22.
  18. ↑ Joshi, Shashank (27 September 2016). "India's strategic restraint on Kashmir". Lowy Institute. The Interpreter. Retrieved 2021-06-22.
  19. ↑ Singh, Tavleen (2016-10-07). "Fifth column: No more strategic restraint". The Indian Express. Retrieved 2021-06-22.
  20. ↑ Mehta, Ashok K. (10 March 2019). "India Has Clearly Abandoned Its Policy of Strategic Restraint". The Wire. Retrieved 2021-06-22.
  21. ↑ Fair, C. Christine (27 February 2019). "Indian millennials, fed on a post-Kargil diet, don't want strategic restraint with Pakistan". The Print. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
  22. ↑ Ron, James (2000). "Savage Restraint: Israel, Palestine and the Dialectics of Legal Repression". Social Problems. 47 (4): 445–472. doi:10.2307/3097130. ISSN   0037-7791. JSTOR   3097130.

Bibliography

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.