257
space, as rightly specified by the ICJ, is not an abstraction but a fundamental element of life. However the protection was very limited and compliance with the
rules was and still is a difficult objective, particularly in consideration of the fact
that the environment is merely seen as an object.
Since then through the waves in the 1970 we have acquired a deeper awareness
that the protection and preservation of the natural environment is fundamental to the
survival of the human kind. Direct considerations, and not merely indirect one, must
be regarded in means and methods of warfare under different assumption of the
notion of environment. The development of international law is quite slow and modern methods of warfare do not easily fall in old rules. Moreover it is also rather
unreasonable to conceive the environment in isolation from other parts. Biology and
many branches of science have advanced our perception and understanding of the
environment as an interconnected whole. This is not properly reflected in the law
which continues to regulate segments of the environment, segments of life. Lacking
an understanding of the implications of an incorrect interpretation of the notion of
environment from a legal standpoint requires precaution. There is in fact never scientific certainty as to the effects on the environment of certain military operations
and therefore all feasible precaution must be considered and taken to avoid incidental damages to the environment (Rule 44).
The second important more schematic approach is the one arising from the 1859
Battle of Solferino in Italy, a major battle in world history, following which the
determination of Henry Dunant, founder of the Red Cross, gave birth to the conference of nations and to the setting out of the process that led to the four Geneva
Conventions in 1949. The Conventions were updating the antecedent treaties of the
1929, and were followed by the adoption of two Additional Protocols in 1977 and a
third one in 2005. The treaties were establishing the standards of international law
for the humane treatment in armed conflict, of international and non-international
nature, such as rules for the protection of the wounded, shipwrecked, prisoners of
war, or in general those who do not take part in hostilities, protection rules for civilians and civilian objects. Both streams, the Hague and the Geneva streams, are now
technically under the same body of law, known as Law of Armed Conflict or
International Humanitarian Law. It continues to develop in order to respond to questions that modern warfare poses, while the basic principles remain a constant,
namely Military Necessity, Distinction, Humanity, Proportionality, and Precaution.
Other legal instruments complement the protection of the environment in warfare, such as the 1977 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other
Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD Convention),
which prohibits parties from engaging in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques, having widespread, long-lasting or sever effects
as means of destruction, damage or injury to any other party.
Additionally, in the wave of expansion of the general body of international environmental law, there is an extensive list of new international treaties that would be
impossible to cite, of which some examples are the 1982 United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Montego Bay, the 1980 Convention on Certain
on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Certain Conventional Weapons which May Be
Environmental Damages and Armed Conflict
space, as rightly specified by the ICJ, is not an abstraction but a fundamental element of life. However the protection was very limited and compliance with the
rules was and still is a difficult objective, particularly in consideration of the fact
that the environment is merely seen as an object.
Since then through the waves in the 1970 we have acquired a deeper awareness
that the protection and preservation of the natural environment is fundamental to the
survival of the human kind. Direct considerations, and not merely indirect one, must
be regarded in means and methods of warfare under different assumption of the
notion of environment. The development of international law is quite slow and modern methods of warfare do not easily fall in old rules. Moreover it is also rather
unreasonable to conceive the environment in isolation from other parts. Biology and
many branches of science have advanced our perception and understanding of the
environment as an interconnected whole. This is not properly reflected in the law
which continues to regulate segments of the environment, segments of life. Lacking
an understanding of the implications of an incorrect interpretation of the notion of
environment from a legal standpoint requires precaution. There is in fact never scientific certainty as to the effects on the environment of certain military operations
and therefore all feasible precaution must be considered and taken to avoid incidental damages to the environment (Rule 44).
The second important more schematic approach is the one arising from the 1859
Battle of Solferino in Italy, a major battle in world history, following which the
determination of Henry Dunant, founder of the Red Cross, gave birth to the conference of nations and to the setting out of the process that led to the four Geneva
Conventions in 1949. The Conventions were updating the antecedent treaties of the
1929, and were followed by the adoption of two Additional Protocols in 1977 and a
third one in 2005. The treaties were establishing the standards of international law
for the humane treatment in armed conflict, of international and non-international
nature, such as rules for the protection of the wounded, shipwrecked, prisoners of
war, or in general those who do not take part in hostilities, protection rules for civilians and civilian objects. Both streams, the Hague and the Geneva streams, are now
technically under the same body of law, known as Law of Armed Conflict or
International Humanitarian Law. It continues to develop in order to respond to questions that modern warfare poses, while the basic principles remain a constant,
namely Military Necessity, Distinction, Humanity, Proportionality, and Precaution.
Other legal instruments complement the protection of the environment in warfare, such as the 1977 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other
Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD Convention),
which prohibits parties from engaging in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques, having widespread, long-lasting or sever effects
as means of destruction, damage or injury to any other party.
Additionally, in the wave of expansion of the general body of international environmental law, there is an extensive list of new international treaties that would be
impossible to cite, of which some examples are the 1982 United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Montego Bay, the 1980 Convention on Certain
on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Certain Conventional Weapons which May Be
Environmental Damages and Armed Conflict