Proportionality In Military

PROPORTIONALITY

Proportionality is a principle that addresses how much force is necessary to achieve a military objective. It requires combatants to take deliberate care to minimize harm to innocent civilians during an armed attack. The principle of proportionality pro¬hibits attacks on military targets where the expect¬ed harm to civilians would be excessive compared to the military advantage expected to be gained from the attack (Grove 2013).

Second, a state resorting to the use of force must prove its use of force was proportionate to the military campaign's objective. Article 51(5) of Additional Protocol I prohibits attacks which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects which

The operation of a drone is done remotely thus creating a distance between the operator and the target. This raises the question of the drone operator as a legal combatant. The operators of drones hardly fit the criteria for a combatant under IHL and may be too disconnected from the target in terms of distance and time that it raises the question of his legitimacy as a combatant (Sterio 2012). International humanitarian law seeks to limit the means of warfare, including by limiting certain technologies through treaties. It addresses itself to the specific nature of what drones and other military technology may be permitted to do in the military theatre. International humanitarian law outlines acceptable methods of warfare, which are defined and constrained in the Geneva and Hague conventions. This contains provisions for the protection of combatants, non-combatants, civilians, prisoners of war and medical personnel in the battle

It is clear that under IHL, the United States is not engaged in an armed conflict which should be regulated by the law. Thus the criminal activities of Al Qaeda operatives can only be addressed through a law enforcement paradigm or international human rights law.

According to a May 2010 report by the then UN rapporteur for extra judicial killings, the use of drones for targeted killings outside armed conflict would most certainly be illegal. The US claim to be engaged in a global war on terrorism raises issues such as the scope of the war, the criteria for selection of those targeted and the existence of accountability mechanisms. The US has converted the entire world into a battlefield where drone attacks can be directed at individuals anywhere anytime (Benjamin, 2012).

Drones could satisfy the rules of international humanitarian law, if launched against a well-known military target, to advance military objectives, not harm civilians to a degree disproportionate to the military objective sought, and if the drone attack would not cause unnecessary suffering. Such a drone attack could comply with the rules of International humanitarian