Whose war is it anyway? Proportionate reparations in wars of aggression
Abstract This article proposes a hybrid legal framework combining jus ad bellum and jus in bello to govern the attribution of State responsibility for reparations at the end of a war of aggression. To this end, the article considers former international mass claims processes and proposes a complementary approach that, on the one hand, acknowledges the role of the aggressor State in waging the war, and on the other, takes a cautionary approach to prevent a disproportionate burden of compensation being imposed on the aggressor State as a form of collective punishment. The consequences of respective violations of the prohibition of the use of force and the law of war are blurred in a war of aggression, resulting in complexities around liability for aggressor States. In response, this article concludes with a nuanced proposal to calculate compensation based on (1) the aggressor party's capacity to comply with jus in bello ; (2) the extent of damage caused by the war of aggression, factoring in jus ad bellum considerations if a party is found to be intentionally maximizing destruction; and (3) the incorporation of tort law principles for equitable attribution of responsibility.
Authors
- Arnaaz Nizami Ameer
Institutions
- Harvard University Press (US)
- Arab Center for International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Education (FR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- International Review of the Red Cross
- Published
- 2024-10-02
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s1816383124000249
- Primary Topic
- International Law and Human Rights
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00