Analogy at war: proportionality, equality and the law of targeting
(2013) In Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 43. p.205-230- Abstract
- This text is an inquiry into how the international community is understood in and through international law. My prism for this inquiry shall be the principle of proportionality in international humanitarian law, relating expected civilian losses to anticipated military advantage. To properly understand proportionality, I have to revert to the structure of analogical thinking in the thomistic tradition. Proportionality presupposes a third element to which civilian losses and military advantage can be related. In a first reading, I develop how this tradition of thought might explain the difficulties contemporary IHL doctrine has in understanding proportionality. If military commanders misconceive the third element as the sovereignty of their... (More)
- This text is an inquiry into how the international community is understood in and through international law. My prism for this inquiry shall be the principle of proportionality in international humanitarian law, relating expected civilian losses to anticipated military advantage. To properly understand proportionality, I have to revert to the structure of analogical thinking in the thomistic tradition. Proportionality presupposes a third element to which civilian losses and military advantage can be related. In a first reading, I develop how this tradition of thought might explain the difficulties contemporary IHL doctrine has in understanding proportionality. If military commanders misconceive the third element as the sovereignty of their own state, they will invariably apply the proportionality principle in a paternalistic manner. This would obviate the most rudimentary idea of equality among states and do away with the common of an international community. In a second reading, I shall explore whether this third element could instead be thought of as a demos, while retaining the existing framework of analogical thinking. My argument is that this secularizing replacement is possible. Practically, its consequence would be a radical change in the task of the responsible military commander determining proportionality. That commander would now need to rethink civilians endangered by an attack as a demos whose potentiality must be preserved. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3158271
- author
- Noll, Gregor LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2013
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- proportionality, international humanitarian law, international community, collateral damage, analogia entis, analogy, Erich Przywara, Jacques Rancière, targeting, war, folkrätt, public international law
- in
- Netherlands Yearbook of International Law
- volume
- 43
- pages
- 205 - 230
- publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85041072683
- ISSN
- 0167-6768
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- be837e2a-6c25-40c4-85f4-69df4ba160d8 (old id 3158271)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 13:34:42
- date last changed
- 2025-04-04 14:39:34
@article{be837e2a-6c25-40c4-85f4-69df4ba160d8,
abstract = {{This text is an inquiry into how the international community is understood in and through international law. My prism for this inquiry shall be the principle of proportionality in international humanitarian law, relating expected civilian losses to anticipated military advantage. To properly understand proportionality, I have to revert to the structure of analogical thinking in the thomistic tradition. Proportionality presupposes a third element to which civilian losses and military advantage can be related. In a first reading, I develop how this tradition of thought might explain the difficulties contemporary IHL doctrine has in understanding proportionality. If military commanders misconceive the third element as the sovereignty of their own state, they will invariably apply the proportionality principle in a paternalistic manner. This would obviate the most rudimentary idea of equality among states and do away with the common of an international community. In a second reading, I shall explore whether this third element could instead be thought of as a demos, while retaining the existing framework of analogical thinking. My argument is that this secularizing replacement is possible. Practically, its consequence would be a radical change in the task of the responsible military commander determining proportionality. That commander would now need to rethink civilians endangered by an attack as a demos whose potentiality must be preserved.}},
author = {{Noll, Gregor}},
issn = {{0167-6768}},
keywords = {{proportionality; international humanitarian law; international community; collateral damage; analogia entis; analogy; Erich Przywara; Jacques Rancière; targeting; war; folkrätt; public international law}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{205--230}},
publisher = {{Cambridge University Press}},
series = {{Netherlands Yearbook of International Law}},
title = {{Analogy at war: proportionality, equality and the law of targeting}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/3453871/3630294.pdf}},
volume = {{43}},
year = {{2013}},
}