The Image before the Weapon

Abstract

Since at least the Middle Ages, the laws of war have distinguished between combatants and civilians under the principle of distinction. The principle of distinction is invoked in contemporary conflicts as if there were an unmistakable and sure distinction to be made between combatant and civilian. It is precisely the distinction between civilian and combatant, upon which the protection of civilians is founded, that cannot be taken as self-evident or stable. The history of international humanitarian law itself admits the difficulty of such a distinction. The book explores the evolution of the concept of the civilian and how it has been applied in warfare. A series of discourses have shaped the legal, military, and historical understandings of the civilian and the book documents how these discourses converge at particular junctures to demarcate the difference between civilian and combatant. The book identifies the foundational ambiguities and inconsistencies in the principle of distinction, as well as the significant role played by Christian concepts of mercy and charity. It then turns to the definition and treatment of civilians in specific armed conflicts: the American Civil War and the U.S.–Indian wars of the nineteenth century, and the civil wars of Guatemala and El Salvador in the 1980s. Finally, the book analyzes the two modern treaties most influential for the principle of distinction. The book shows how the experiences of the two world wars, but particularly World War II, and the Algerian war of independence affected these subsequent codifications of the laws of war.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 174 citations exist upstream.