Armed conflicts

1. Definition

The Conventions and the Protocols intentionally use the term “armed conflict” instead of
war, in order to capture the spectrum of violent conflicts in which NSAs are involved. 1
However its restrictiveness to only consider two categories2 of armed conflicts,
international and non-international armed conflicts, concludes that it does not apply on
internal tensions or disturbances or other isolated acts of violence.3

The classification of an armed conflict as an international or a non-international conflict is

fundamental with regard to the Conventions and the protection of the wars victims. If an
armed conflict can be viewed as a conflict of an international character then the whole
jus in bello applies to the conflict. However, if the same conflict is considered to be of a
non-international character, then it is simply the basic rules of Common Article 3 which
will be applicable, significantly limiting the protection offered to those involved in such
4
conflict.

To be clear, a large number of customary rules of IHL are always applicable to both
international and non-international armed conflicts. The qualification of the conflict as
international or non-international can be conceived less relevant in our days, since these
5
customary rules apply in any armed conflict. This is however not without critics; as
some scholars argue that State practice and opinio juris does not apply IHL to conflicts
between states and NSAs and that States have always distinguished between conflicts
against one another, to which the entire body of IHL applied, and other armed conflicts,
to which they were never prepared to apply those same rules, but only more limited
humanitarian rules.

1
See Common Article 2and 3 of the Geneva Conventions 1949; Article 1 of Additional Protocol I; Article 1 Additional Protocol II
2
But IHL distinguishes four types of armed conflicts with different rules and instruments applicable to each:(1) international
armed conflict to which the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Additional Protocol I of 1977, the Hague rules and other legal
principles apply; (2) international armed conflicts amounting to wars of national liberation which are principally defined by and
made subject to Additional Protocol I of 1977;(3) non-international armed conflicts which are subjected to the regulation of
Article 3 Common to the four Geneva Conventions, and to some customary norms; and (4) non-international armed conflicts
which are narrowly defined and regulated by Additional Protocol II of 1977. See
http://ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/train7_g.pdf

3
http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=003731&tid=001.
4
On the subject of the Geneva Conventions and Common Article 2, Rwelamira comments:” The only mitigation to this rigorous
provision was mildly provided for in common Article 3, which specified certain minimum standards to be applied in internal
conflicts, i.e. wars of non-international character. Common Article 3 required parties to the conflict to be guided by
considerations of humanity towards each other – Rwelamira in Swinarski 1984, p.230.
5
According to a study carried out by ICRC in order to identify, and consequently facilitate the application of existing rules of
customary international humanitarian law. This study was requested on the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent, December 1995.