GA.CJJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (Clifford Johnson) (06/28/89)
From: "Clifford Johnson" <GA.CJJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU> Here, without comment, a couple of excerpts from "Nuclear Weapons and International Law," by Judge Nagendra Singh (ex-Pres. of Int'l Court of Justice), re exploding bullets: [T]he Declaration of St. Petersberg of 1868 prohibiting explosive projectiles is generally regarded as inapplicable to war in the air. The position appears to be that in the context of warfare in the nineteeth century, as mechanised troops had not then come into existence, the use of projectiles on land would have been directed at the armed forces as such and thus caused aggravation of human suffering. The same could not be said in regard to the use of projectiles against an aircraft which represents an inanimate object. However, the possibility of the weapon damaging a piloted aircraft and then hitting the crew could not be ruled out. But, in that event, the chances were that the aircraft would crash, putting an abrupt end to the lives of the personnel involved without aggravating human suffering which was the raison d'etre of the 1868 Declaration. Thus it appears that the use projectiles, though prohibited by the Declaration of St. Petersberg in 1868, should be permitted in air warfare. It remains for consideration if lazer beams could be regarded as 'projectiles' or otherwise prohibited. . . [T]he 1899 Declaration (Hague) prohibits expanding bullets. The basic principle which outlaws expanding bullets is that relating to unnecessary suffering. On that principle, blast and heat effects, whether from TNT bombing or nuclear devices, may perhaps be permissible, but not the radio-active fallout which spreads to unpredictable limits and leads to prolonged suffering, often followed by death. To: MILITARY@ATT.ATT.COM