Use of Force, and International Humanitarian Law

In the second week of September 2007, leading U.S. military and diplomatic officials provided long-awaited reports to Congress and the President on U.S. political and military activities in Iraq. These hearings focused attention on how much progress U.S. counterinsurgency (COIN) efforts have made in Iraq. Although debate surrounding these events centered on the question of the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the testimony and hearings connect the ongoing attempts by the U.S. government to adjust to the challenges presented by waging COIN campaigns.

On July 14, 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a federal decree "On Suspending the Russian Federation's Participation in the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and Related International Agreements."[1] Beyond the political fallout, Russia's decree raises several questions about when a state can suspend its treaty obligations and the legal consequences that flow from such a suspension.

On July 7, 2007, the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism[1] enters into force. July 7 is the 30th day after the receipt of the 22nd instrument of ratification (from Bangladesh), which the Convention required for its entry into force (Article 25.1). This Insight describes this Convention and its place in the global efforts underway to prevent acts of nuclear terrorism.

Background to the Convention

Introduction

On April 29, 2007, the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)[1] marks the tenth anniversary of its entry into force. Along with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), the CWC forms an important part of the international law supporting disarmament and non-proliferation concerning weapons of mass destruction.

Recently, David Hicks, an Australian interned for over five years in Guantanamo Bay, became the first individual sentenced under the newly-constituted Military Commission process. Hicks pleaded guilty to one count of intentionally providing material support to al-Qaeda in the context of an armed conflict against the U.S.[1] and will be repatriated to Australia to serve a further nine months of imprisonment.

On February 26, 2007, the International Court of Justice issued its judgment in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro).[1] The case marked the first time that a country sued another country for breaches of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide ("the Convention").

On February 20, 2007, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an important decision in long-running litigation brought by detainees held by the United States at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba military facility.[1] Disposing of a score of consolidated appeals involving 63 foreign nationals, the two-judge majority in Boumediene v.

On February 27, 2007, the Office of the Prosecutor (Prosecutor) at the International Criminal Court (ICC) applied to the Pre-Trial Chamber I (Chamber) for summonses to appear against Ahmad Muhammad Harun, Sudan's former Minister of State for the Interior, and Ali Kushayb, a Janjaweed leader in West Darfur.[1] The Application contend

On January 29, 2007, the International Criminal Court (ICC) Pretrial Chamber I (Chamber) issued its confirmation of charges decision in the case of Prosecutor v.