what if anything justifies armed conflict

“There has been much controversy in the past over the relationship between violence, peace and security, but one view of what constitutes an armed conflict-with the elements of battle, political objectives and government participation at its core-has until recently dominated in both academic and policy circles” (emphasis added, Brzoska, 2007). IT-94-1-AR 72, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Appeals Chamber in International Organization for Migration (IOM). “An armed conflict exists whenever there is a resort to armed force between States or protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a state.” 2, Geneva Conventions I-IV, 1949 in International Organization for Migration (IOM). ““All cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more…, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.”Īrt. Comment: ‘Armed conflict’ is also referred to as ‘state-based conflict’, as opposed to ‘ non-state conflict’, in which none of the warring parties is a government.” “An armed conflict is a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in one calendar year.

“A political conflict in which armed combat involves the armed forces of at least one state (or one or more armed factions seeking to gain control of all or part of the state), and in which at least 1,000 people have been killed by the fighting during the course of the conflict.”

What if anything justifies armed conflict