International Law Pertaining To The Protection Of Natural Environment In Times Of Armed Conflict

The history of humankind cannot be separated from the history of war, or armed conflict. In addition to human casualties and injuries, wars have also undeniably brought severe environmental damage and ecological disturbance. There has long been concern about the environmental impact of war and the environment has long been deliberately targeted as part of the strategy of war. How to strike a balance between the prevention of environmental damage and the conduct of hostilities thus has been a major concern as the global awareness of environmental protection grows.The starting of the research is the examination of the existing framework. Under the legal regime of international humanitarian law, some Conventions, e.g., Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions and the ENMOD, set extremely high thresholds for absolutely prohibited acts that cannot be justified by the demand of military necessity. The customary principles of distinction, proportionality, necessity and humanity could also accord indirect protection as the natural environment is primarily regarded as "civilian object". Under the regime of peacetime international law, certain human rights instruments and multilateral environmental agreements as well provide additional layer of protection to the environment.Violations of either peacetime or wartime obligations would trigger the implementation of international responsibility. The next Chapter reviews three main types of responsibility, i.e., state responsibility, responsibility of international organizations and individual criminal responsibility, and argues that holding states responsible for making reparations could best remedy the natural environment destroyed by war.Based on the observations of primary and secondary rules, it is contended that the adequacy of the rules applicable in international armed conflict should not be questioned, but important terminologies such as "widespread","long-term" and "severe" needs further clarification. While in situations of non-international armed conflicts, lack of concrete applicable rules may lead to future escalations of hostilities as well as more acute over-exploitation of natural resources. In the enforcement phase, the Iraq Model is criticized for reflecting the "victor’s justice" paradigm, which requires modification in future UNSC decision-making process. So the last Chapter proposes different approaches to curb with the identified problems above, with the ultimate goal of reinforcing the emphasis paid on the wartime environmental damage.