Armed confrontation during coronavirus fight violates law of war

By Saraha Akello

The world is under lockdown. Human activity, freedoms and peace have been interrupted by a global pandemic (coronavirus) that claimed its first victim in China late December 2019 currently threatening the entire human species.

Nations and governments are working to contain the spread of this deadly virus that by GMT +0 hours on 30th March 2020 had affected about 723,124 people with 33,986 deaths globally. The pandemic is what the UN Secretary-General referred to as a ‘'common enemy'' in a passionate appeal for ‘global ceasefire' on 23rd March 2020.

Antonio Guterres' call followed continued hostilities in the Middle East and other areas of violent conflict with fears the virus could spread fast in volatile situations and worsen humanitarian conditions of people in displacement camps.

His call also came barely a week after retaliatory attacks on 13th Mach by the United States in Iraq on sites they claimed were run by Iran backed militia they accused of killing two American and a British soldier near Baghdad.

Despite the call which is in line with the law regulating war, some parties have continued to violate the International Humanitarian Law (IHL), the instrument used to regulate the conduct of armed conflict.

North Korea is accused by the South of launching short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan on 29th March 2020 the same day Yemen's Houthi rebels are blamed by Saudi Arabia of firing missiles at Riyadh and Jizan despite all sides in the Yemeni war agreeing to a ceasefire to concentrate on the Coronavirus pandemic. Aggressive tendencies by warring parties during this time by all standards violate the law of war.

The Geneva Convention of 1949 and its additional protocols plus the Hague Law of 1899 and 1987 define basic war times, restricts methods employed in warfare, talks about resolving humanitarian concerns in war situations among others. The Law restricts methods of warfare and protects persons who are no longer interested in armed conflict. This Law which has developed over decades is an expansion of old Italian, English law or traditional law. Even

before the Geneva law was crafted there were concepts in traditional law that show that the principles expounded in IHL were already embedded into English/Italian law. The ‘new law' derives its principles from the Latin word "Jus in bello'' meaning the right conduct in war. The other concept is "Jus ad bellion" to mean the right to go to war which is really about the morality of war and "Jus post bellum" which deals with the morality of post-war resettlement and reconstruction, basically talking about the responsibility of the state and actors in a war to ensure that there are modalities for reconstruction and resettlement.

By 2015, 196 countries had ratified the Convention either in whole or part. States have the right to reservation clauses and it is legally acceptable to make exclusions to clauses.

Under IHL primary parties (those directly involved in the conflict) have obligations towards the Treaty and are liable to penalties.

With nations rallying their resources towards the treatment of those infected with the deadly virus and focused on protecting and preventing further spread of the virus confrontations against the opponent at ‘their weakest point' is in contravention of the law of war and should be condemned in the strongest terms possible.

Although the Geneva law has had its own limitations on enforceability, it has greatly reduced effects of war especially the reduction of human suffering in war situations.

All parties involved in combat warfare must heed to the UN Secretary General's call to cease all forms of hostilities to allow nation states to deal with the COVID 19 pandemic.

The writer is a master's student of Peace and Conflict Studies at Makerere University