International Humanitarian Law



International Humanitarian Law

Question 1

In the case of Operation Just Cause in 1989 in Panama, the United States argued that there was no armed conflict triggering the Geneva Conventions because there was no dispute between the two states. Does that argument make sense when there were U.S. troops in Panama and armed hostilities between the two sides?

Answer

Armed Conflict

In order to determine the rightful view, it is very much essential to evaluate whether the event was armed conflict at all. According to Gary D. Solis, a simple exchange of shots between the guards on border of two hostile states on a contested national boundary determined the armed conflict between the two states, however, it is unlikely to be approached as border incident Thus, there is no worldwide accepted definition of armed conflict due to the reason that the circumstances that can or cannot comprise of armed conflict are several and nuanced. According to Laurie R. Blank and Gregory P. Noone, when the armed conflict is suggested in a specific locale by the circumstances, it is the first and foremost thing to determine whether there is an armed conflict, if yes, then what type of armed conflict. Though the parties involve will mostly seek to characterize the situation in the way most beneficial to their strategic, political, and legal standing, often by denying the armed conflict existence at all, the Geneva Convention clearly selected to not leaving this determination on parties. As if the international humanitarian law application was relied completely on the unrestricted verdict of the involved bodies in the disagreement then in most of the cases there is a propensity for the clash to be reduced by the concerned bodies. So, the mere statement of the United States regarding 'no armed conflict' exists between Panama and the U.S. is not justifiable, since the United States is one of the involved parties in the conflict and can minimized or reduce the conflict intensity in order to characterize the situation in the way most beneficial to its strategic, legal, and political position.

Geneva Convention - Article 2

The Article 2 of Geneva Convention clearly states that the Convention is applicable on all the cases of declared war or of any other armed. Further, it is also emphasized that the Convention will also applicable to all cases of total or partial territory occupation of a High Contracting Parties. Where, the government has determined that the United States Armed Forces deployment to Panama on December 20, 1989 as the 'hostilities' in the Panama. Subsequently, the government declared that Operation Just Cause case clearly involved an 'armed conflict' as per the implication of article 2, as the army troops interfered in a clash among the both the parties of treaty. According to the RCC to the Convention of 1949, any dispute taking place among two countries and resulting in the interference of armed forces associates is an 'armed conflict' within the Article 2 meaning. Furthermore, the lasting duration of conflict, number of slaughtering takes place, ...