Advanced

The Law of Targeting - A Comparison between the United States and Sweden

Persson, Fredrik LU (2014) JURM02 20141
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Uppsatsen syftar till att jämföra hur tolkningen av targeting-reglerna inom den humanitära rätten skiljer sig åt mellan Sverige och USA. Uppsatsen fokuserar på grunderna inom targeting, dvs. distinktions- och proportionalitetsprincipen, och avser att åskådliggöra den amerikanska och svenska synen på vad som utgör ett lagligt mål och hur ett sådant mål attackeras på ett lagligt vis.

En komparativ metod används för att belys skillnader och likheter mellan USA och Sverige. Jämförelsen presenteras i ljuset av AP1 och dess targeting-regler.

Uppsatsen inleds med en kort historisk del om krigets lagar och targeting-reglerna. De viktigaste delarna av uppsatsen är grovt indelat i två delar: Vad utgör ett lagligt mål, och hur kan ett sådant... (More)
Uppsatsen syftar till att jämföra hur tolkningen av targeting-reglerna inom den humanitära rätten skiljer sig åt mellan Sverige och USA. Uppsatsen fokuserar på grunderna inom targeting, dvs. distinktions- och proportionalitetsprincipen, och avser att åskådliggöra den amerikanska och svenska synen på vad som utgör ett lagligt mål och hur ett sådant mål attackeras på ett lagligt vis.

En komparativ metod används för att belys skillnader och likheter mellan USA och Sverige. Jämförelsen presenteras i ljuset av AP1 och dess targeting-regler.

Uppsatsen inleds med en kort historisk del om krigets lagar och targeting-reglerna. De viktigaste delarna av uppsatsen är grovt indelat i två delar: Vad utgör ett lagligt mål, och hur kan ett sådant mål attackeras lagligt. Varje avsnitt avslutas med en jämförande analys.

Uppsatsen visar att den amerikanska synen på vad som är acceptabelt beteende i internationell humanitär rätt är bredare än den svenska. Både vad gäller vilka personer och objekt som utgör lagliga mål, och hur man lagligt angriper dessa mål. Sverige, som har ratificerat AP1 till skillnad från USA, har en snävare tolkning av internationell humanitär rätt och följer, i vissa situationer, till stor del Internationella Rödakorskommitténs vägledning. (Less)
Abstract
The purpose of the thesis is to compare how the interpretation of the law of targeting differs between the United States and Sweden. The thesis is focused on the basis of the law of targeting, i.e. the principles of distinction and proportionality, and answers the questions of what the view of the United States and Sweden is regarding what constitutes a lawful target and how to lawfully attack such a target lawfully.

The thesis is based on a comparative method, in order to highlight the similarities and differences between the United States and Sweden. The comparison is presented in the light of API, and therein targeting rules.

The thesis starts with a brief look at the law of armed conflict and the law of targeting in history and... (More)
The purpose of the thesis is to compare how the interpretation of the law of targeting differs between the United States and Sweden. The thesis is focused on the basis of the law of targeting, i.e. the principles of distinction and proportionality, and answers the questions of what the view of the United States and Sweden is regarding what constitutes a lawful target and how to lawfully attack such a target lawfully.

The thesis is based on a comparative method, in order to highlight the similarities and differences between the United States and Sweden. The comparison is presented in the light of API, and therein targeting rules.

The thesis starts with a brief look at the law of armed conflict and the law of targeting in history and different sources. The main parts of the thesis are roughly divided into two parts: What constitutes a lawful target, and how to attack such a target lawfully. Each section ends with a comparative analysis.

The thesis concludes that the American view of what is acceptable conduct in IHL is wider than that of the Swedish view. Both in terms of which individuals and objects constitute lawful targets, and how to lawfully attack these targets. Sweden, which has ratified AP1 unlike the United States, has a more narrow interpretation of IHL and follows, in some situations, to a large extent the guidance of ICRC. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Persson, Fredrik LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM02 20141
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Targeting, IHL
language
English
id
4584481
date added to LUP
2014-09-10 14:17:02
date last changed
2016-02-09 17:15:30
@misc{4584481,
  abstract     = {The purpose of the thesis is to compare how the interpretation of the law of targeting differs between the United States and Sweden. The thesis is focused on the basis of the law of targeting, i.e. the principles of distinction and proportionality, and answers the questions of what the view of the United States and Sweden is regarding what constitutes a lawful target and how to lawfully attack such a target lawfully. 

The thesis is based on a comparative method, in order to highlight the similarities and differences between the United States and Sweden. The comparison is presented in the light of API, and therein targeting rules. 

The thesis starts with a brief look at the law of armed conflict and the law of targeting in history and different sources. The main parts of the thesis are roughly divided into two parts: What constitutes a lawful target, and how to attack such a target lawfully. Each section ends with a comparative analysis.

The thesis concludes that the American view of what is acceptable conduct in IHL is wider than that of the Swedish view. Both in terms of which individuals and objects constitute lawful targets, and how to lawfully attack these targets. Sweden, which has ratified AP1 unlike the United States, has a more narrow interpretation of IHL and follows, in some situations, to a large extent the guidance of ICRC.},
  author       = {Persson, Fredrik},
  keyword      = {Targeting,IHL},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {The Law of Targeting - A Comparison between the United States and Sweden},
  year         = {2014},
}