Targeting After Operation Allied Force: Has the Law Changed for CINCs and Their Planners?

Abstract

Recent reports published by Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) charge that NATO forces in ALLIED FORCE selected and attacked targets in violation of the Law of Armed Conflict. If these allegations are true, it follows that the CINC with responsibility for ALLIED FORCE--and his planners--violated the law, with potential liability for themselves and NATO and the U.S. Additionally, if the AT and HRW charges are true, then current CINCs and their planners cannot look to ALLIED FORCE as a model for targeting in any future military operation. An examination of the Al and HRW allegations, however, reveals that they are incorrect for two reasons: either the two organizations are wrong on the facts or, alternatively, they have misstated the law. Targets selected during ALLIED FORCE were legitimate military objectives, and were lawfully attacked. As a result, ALLIED FORCE is a proper and valid model for future targeting operations.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
May 14, 2001
Accession Number
ADA392766

Entities

People

  • Fred L. Borch

Organizations

  • Naval War College

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Air Platforms
  • Counter IED
  • Counter WMD
  • Energy and Power Technologies
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Defense
  • Air Force
  • Governments
  • Guided Bombs
  • Human Rights
  • Interagency Coordination
  • International Law
  • Law
  • Military Operations
  • Military Organizations
  • Munitions
  • Nato
  • Precision-Guided Munitions
  • United States
  • United States European Command
  • War Colleges
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Criminal Law
  • Irregular Warfare and Special Operations Cyberspace Operations against Adversarial Threats.
  • Systems Analysis and Design