Chapter Chivalry A Principle of the Law of Armed Conict Terry Gill Abstract This contribution - PDF document

Chapter2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?TerryGillAbstractThiscontributionexplorestheroleandrelevanceofchivalryinrelationtowarfarepastandpresentanditsrelationshiptothelawofarmedconßictandposesthequestionwhetheritstillisaprincipleofthatbodyofthelaw.Italsobrießyaddressesthequestionofwhatitspotentialrelevanceisasaguidingprincipleintheinterpretationoflegalandextralegalobligationsalongsiderulescontainedinconventionalandcustomarylaw.2.1Introduction.......................................................................................................................342.2TheRelationshipofChivalrytoWarfareanditsRoleintheDevelopmentoftheLawofArmedConflict.........................................................................................352.2.1SomeExamplesofChivalryinthePracticeofWarfare....................................382.3ChivalryandHonourableConductasPartoftheLawofWar.....................................402.3.1ChivalryasaGuidingPrinciple...........................................................................432.4ChivalryÕsRelevanceandLimitsinWarfare..................................................................462.5Conclusions.......................................................................................................................49References..................................................................................................................................50 AvrilMcDonaldwasalovelypersonandfriendandanesteemedcolleague,andthispieceisdedicatedtohermemorywithaffectionandrespect.TheauthorisProfessorofMilitaryLaw,UniversityofAmsterdamandTheNetherlandsDefenceAcademy. T.Gill(MilitaryLaw,UniversityofAmsterdamandTheNetherlandsDefenceAcademy,Amsterdam,TheNetherlandse-mail:T.D.Gill@uva.nlT.GillMilitaryLaw,TheNetherlandsDefenceAcademy,DenHelder,TheNetherlandsM.Mattheeetal.(eds.),ArmedConflictandInternationalLaw:InSearchoftheHumanFace,DOI:10.1007/978-90-6704-918-4_2,SSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlands,andtheauthors2013 2.1IntroductionThenotionofchivalryhasacertainairofromance,andformanyperhaps,ofbeingÔÔold-fashionedÕÕandunworldlyaboutitandisoftenassociatedwithimagesofknightsinshiningarmourÞghtingduelsonhorsebackandwooingfairladiesperchedonbalconies.However,ithasplayedanimportantroleinthedevelopmentofthelawofwar,nowusuallyreferredtoasinternationalhumanitarianlaworthelawofarmedconßict.Inthatcontextitcanbetterbeseenasembodyingnotionsofhonourableconductandfairplay,whichhavetheirrootsinwhatissometimesreferredtoasÔÔthecodeofthewarriorÕÕandmilitarytradition.Ithasbeen,andstillis,identiÞedinsomemilitarymanualsasoneofthefundamentalprinciplesofthisbranchofthelawandelementsofithaveobtainedthestatusofbindingrulesoflawofaconventionaland/orcustomarynature.ItwashistoricallyatleastpartlybasedonadegreeofmutualrespectandreciprocitybetweenadversariessharingthesameorsimilartraditionsandsubjectedtothesamedangersonthebattleÞeld.Theprincipalquestionthatwillbeaddressedinthisshortcontributioniswhatroleithasplayedinthedevelopmentofthelawofwarandwhetherithadandstillhasaplaceinthelawasaruleorprincipleofthelawofwar.Ifitdidordoes,whatisitsstatustodayintheworldofasymmetricalwarfareandremotetargetedkilling,whicharefarremovedfromtraditionalfacetofaceencountersbetweenlike-mindedadversariessharingacommoncodeofwarriorethicsandtraditions?DoeschivalrystillhaveanyrelevanceontodayÕsbattleÞeld?Ifso,whatmightitsroleandrelevancebe?Isitstillapartofthelawofarmedconßict?Beforeattemptingtoanswerthesequestions,ashorthistoricaloverviewwillbegivenoftherolethatchivalryhasplayedinthedevelopmentofthelaw(andpractice)ofarmedconßict,alongsidediscussionofwhatthenotionofchivalrysigniÞesinrelationtothelawofarmedconßictandconductonthebattleÞeld.TheroleofthefundamentalprinciplesofhumanitarianlawasgeneralprinciplesoflawandasanormativeframeworkfortheentirecorpusofpositivelegalobligationscontainedinconventionsandspeciÞcrulesofacustomarynaturewillbeexaminedandtheplaceofchivalryalongsidetheotherprincipleswillreceiveattention.Thiswillbefollowedbyanexaminationofcertainrulesoftreatyandcustomarylawwhicharedirectlybasedupontheprincipleofchivalryandhonourableconduct,followedbyamoregeneraldiscussionoftheroleofthefundamentalprinciplesofthelawofarmedconßictingeneralandchivalryinparticular,asanassistininterpretingconventionalandcustomaryobligationsandasasourceofguidanceorinspirationinapplyingextralegalconsiderationsofanethicalorpolicycharacter,alongsidelongstandingmilitarypracticebasedonthenotionofchivalrytotheconductofwarfare.Inthiscontext,aparticularroleofchivalryasapossible ,pp.1Ð19.BritishManual,pp.1,2;USArmyManual,p.3;CanadianJointForcesManual,Section202,p.2-1;USNavy,pp.5,6;ButseeUKManualandUSNavywherenoreferencestochivalryaremade.T.Gill solutiontothecontroversysurroundingthequestionofdirectparticipationinhostilitieswillbeadvanced.Itwillbearguedthatratherthanattemptingtousetheprincipleofmilitarynecessityasarestraintuponrulesofapositivelegalcharacter,thatthequestionofprovidinganopportunitytosurrendertoanadversaryinca-pableofeffectiveresistance,canbefoundinthenotionofchivalry,asanextra-legalconsiderationbasedonmilitarypracticeandtradition.IntheÞnalsection,theseelementswillbebroughttogetherinanattempttoanswerthequestionsposedaboverelatingtothecontinuedrelevance(orlackthereof)ofchivalryandnotionsofhonourableconductinthedevelopmentofthelawofwaranditsplaceinthecontemporarylawandpracticeofwarfare.2.2TheRelationshipofChivalrytoWarfareanditsRoleintheDevelopmentoftheLawofArmedConßictWhenreferringtonotionsofchivalryandhonourableconductinrelationtowarfare,itisessentialtoidentifywhattheiressentialcharacteristicsareandtohavesomeideaofhowthesehaveinßuencedthedevelopmentofthelaw.Chivalryandmartialhonourhavelongbeenregardedasessentialcomponentsofwarriorethicsandmilitarytradition.Theyarereßectedinmostculturesinonewayoranother,rangingfromWesternwarriortraditiondatingbacktoclassicantiquityandmedievalchivalry,tothevariouswarriorcodesoftheancientandmedievalNearEast,India,ChinaandJapan.TheyalsowerepracticedinvariousformsbymanyotherculturesoutsidethearcofEurasian/Mediterraneancivilisation,includingNativeAmericansandwarriorpeoplesinAfricaandthePaciÞc.Whilethesetraditionsdiffergreatlyinmanyrespects,theydoshareanumberofcommoncharacteristics.Theygenerallyhonourbraveryinthefaceoftheenemy,loyaltytoacommoncauseorindividual,senseofidentity(tribe,citystate,classorcaste,unit,latercountry),goodfaithinkeepingoneÕswordandhonouringagreementsandatleastsomedegreeofclemencytowardsthosewhoareharmless,helplessorwhohavesurrenderedandrequestedmercy.Whilethesecodesdonotalwayscoincidewithcontemporarynotionsofhumanity(prisonersofwarwereenslavedorsacriÞcedinmanyofthem),theyshareacommonideaoridealthatwarfarewasdifferentfromcriminalhomicide,thatriskingoneÕssafetyandlifeforthecommoninterestwasrequiredfromawarriorandthatwarfarewasnotreconcilablewithwantoncrueltyanddestruction.AllofthemsharedsomenotionsrelatingtoÔÔfairplayÕÕanddisdainoftreacheryinbattle.Undertheinßuenceofbothsecularand ,p.21;Greenwood,p.18;Green,pp.23Ð25.,chaptersdealingrespectivelywiththeWestern,ChineseShaolinwarriormonasticcodeandJapaneseSamuraiwarriortraditions,aswellaswiththewarriorethicoftheNativeAmericansoftheGreatPlains;Greenwood,pp.16Ð17,referringtoancientandmedievaltraditionsintheNearEastandIndiaaswellastowarriortraditionsinAfricaand2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?35 religiousmorality,manyofthesetraditionsdevelopedquiteelaboratemoralandlegalcodesofwhatwasallowedandexpectedfromwarriorsonthebattleÞeldandforthetreatmentofpersonswhowerenotunderarmsorwhowereconsideredparticularlyvulnerable,aswellasforobjectsandpropertyconsideredtobesacredorotherwiseworthyofrespect.Theinßuenceofthishasbeenacknowledgedinwritingsrelatingtothehis-toricaldevelopmentofthemodernlawofarmedconßict.Theinßuenceofthemedievalcodeofchivalry,alongwithreligiousandethicalinßuences(e.g.intheformofjustwartradition),aregenerallyreferredtoasthetwomaincomponentsofthepre-modernlawofwar.Rulesexistedandwereenforcedrelatingtothemeansbywhichandthemannerinwhichwarfarewasconducted,respectforemissariesconductingnegotiationsrelatingtotruces,prisonerexchangesortermsofcapit-ulation,respectforwomen,clerics,theelderlyandchildren,aswellastherightofsanctuaryandrespectforreligiousandcertainothertypesofobjectsandproperty.Withthedeclineoffeudalismandthegradualriseofdynastic,mercantileandincreasinglyStates,thebearingofarmsceasedtobeaprerogativereservedtoawarriorclassorcasteandbecameinsteadaprofession.InthelateMiddleAgesandReformationthissawtheincreasinguseofmercenaryarmiesmadeupofsoldiersoffortunewhoservedandfoughtforpayandbooty,andwhennotpaid,wereasmuchadangertotheiremployersandespeciallytothecivilianpopulationasanyenemy.Thereligiouswarsoftheperiodweremarkedbyalackofanylimitationsandwidespreaddevastation,whichledtotheattemptatreintroducingrestraintthroughthedevelopmentof(early)moderninternationallawthroughthewritingsofsuchindividualsasSuarez,Vitoria,GentiliandGrotius,whomouldedtogetherthetraditionsofjustwarintoareasonablycoherentlegalsystem,whichservedasthebasisformoderninternationallaw.ThiswenthandinhandwiththeincreasingofgovernmentalcontroloverthearmedforcesafterthePeaceofWestphaliaandtheirtransformationintoprofessionalarmiesandßeetsintheserviceofthemonarchicalStatesofearlymodernEurope.TheofÞcerclassofthesearmieslargelycomprisedthenobilityandotherswhootherwisequaliÞedasÔÔgentlemenÕÕ,whosawthemselvesastheheirsoftheknightlytraditionandgenerallyconductedwarfare(atleastamongthemselves)inaccordancewiththeemerginglawofwarfareandinaccordancewithnotionsofhonourandchivalry.Battleswerefought,ceaseÞreswereobservedandsiegeswereconductedin ,p.18;Green,pp.25,26.Ibid.;SeealsoLyonsandJackson,pp.274Ð277,relatingtothetermsofsurrendergrantedtheCrusadersbySaladincentralisedatJerusalem.,pp.16Ð19.,pp.28Ð29.,p.24;Greenwood,p.19.,pp.48Ð49.,Chapter4,ÔÔWarsoftheProfessionalsÕÕ,relatingtoeighteenthcenturyarmiesandwarfare.T.Gill conformitywithsometimeselaborate(unwritten)rulesandconventions,andsincewarfarehadbecometheprerogativeoftheStatewhichwaswagedforparticularobjectives,thisledtobothacertainlimitationintheobjectivesofwarsandthewaytheywereconducted.Thisinturnalsoledtoacertaindegreeofhumanisationofwarfareintheformofincreasedrespectforciviliansandtheirproperty(withthenotableexceptionofstormingadefendedcity)andmorehumanetreatmentofprisonersandthewounded.UndertheinßuenceoftheEnlightenment,thedis-tinctionbetweencombatantsandnon-combatants,andpersonsnowreferredtoashorsdecombat,becamewell-deÞnedandgenerallyadheredtointhepracticeofeighteenthcenturywarfare.Thisgraduallybecameacodeofcustomarylaw,whichwasseenasbothlegallybindingaswellasbeingamarkofaprofessionalofÞcer.ThiscustomarycodewasgraduallycodiÞedandfurtherdevelopedoverthecourseofthenineteenthcentury.ThefamousLieberCodewastheÞrstmajorstepalongthisrouteanditwasfollowedbymanyothersuchcodiÞcationsinthelatterpartofthenineteenthcentury.ThiscodiÞcationprocesswasatÞrstlargelyaquestionofnationalregulation,butwiththeHagueConventionsof1899and1907,itbecamepartofinternationaltreatylaw,alongsidetheadoptionoftheGenevaConventionsrelatingtothetreatmentofthewounded.TheHagueConventionsreßectedtheexistingrulesandprinciplesoftheconductofwarfarethathadcharacterisedwarfarebetweenEuropeanStatesreferredtoaboveandassuchwereregardedascustomarylaw,eveninthefaceofthemassviolenceandslaughteroftheensuingworldwars.Bythistimethemassconscriptarmiesofthenine-teenthÐtwentiethcenturieshadreplacedtheearliersmallprofessionalarmiesofthepreviousoneandcodiÞcationwastheonlymeanstoensureareasonabledegreeofadherencetothelaw.However,thesemassconscriptarmies,whilearmedwithmuchmoreÞrepowerandmadeupofamuchbroaderspectrumofthepopulationthantheireighteenthcenturypredecessors,stillincorporatednotionsofhonourandchivalryintotheirmilitarytraditionandattemptedtoinstilthemintothetrainingandinstructionofthemembersofthearmedforces,inparticulartheofÞcerswholedthem.Theystillformpartofmilitarytrainingandinstructionatmilitaryacademiestoday. ,pp.19,20.,p.21;Green,pp.29Ð31.,pp.86,87;Green,pp.33Ð36;Greenwood,p.24.,Chapter6,pp.96Ð115,onthecharacteroflatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturyarmedforcesandwarfare.2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?37 2.2.1SomeExamplesofChivalryinthePracticeofWarfareAfewexamplesfrommilitaryhistorymayservetoillustratetheinßuenceofchivalryandhonourableconductinwarfare.Thesewillbepurelyillustrativeandarenotintendedtoserveasasystematicexamination,whichwouldgofarbeyondtheconÞnesofasingleshortarticlesuchasthisone.AnexampleofwhatwasconsideredtobehonourableconductoftencitedinrelationtoeighteenthcenturyandnineteenthcenturywarfareisthenotionofÔÔleadingbyexampleÕÕandindifferencetodangerandwounds,asameansofbothinspiringthesamefromtheothermembersofthearmyandgainingandmain-tainingtherespectoffellowofÞcers.ThecentralmotivationoftheofÞceraccordingtoonenotedmilitaryhistorianwashonour:ÔhonourwasparamountanditwasbyestablishingoneÕshonourablenesswithoneÕsfellowsthatleadershipwasexertedoverthecommonsoldiersÕ.ThisinvolvednotonlyindifferencetodangerinoneÕspubliccomportment,andkeepingoneÕswordandfaith,therebysettinganexample,butalsorespectforthesamequalitiesinfellowofÞcers,includingthosefromtheopposingside.ThiswasthereasonwhyanofÞcerwhohadfoughtbravelyandhonourablywastreatedwithrespectuponsurrender,forexample,byallowinghimtoretainhisswordorsidearmasamarkofrespect.ItalsolaybehindthepracticeofallowinganofÞcertogivehisparoleenablinghimtomoveaboutfreelywithincertainagreedlimitationsandacceptinghiswordofhonourtonotpartic-ipateinÞghtinguntilofÞciallyexchangedforaprisonerofsimilarrank.ItalsoinßuencedthepracticeofsendingforwardÔÔparlementairesÕÕtoattempttonego-tiateasurrenderwhenthechancesofsuccessfulresistancewereconsideredneg-ligibleanditlaybehindtherespectfortheÔÔwhiteßagÕÕandtheinviolabilityofsuchanemissaryduringnegotiations.Awell-knownexampleofthiswasintheÞnalstagesofthebattleofWaterloowheretheeliteÔÔOldGuardÕÕ,surroundedandoutnumberedafterbeingrepulsedintheirÞnalattempttoforcetheBritishpositionandnowassaultedontherightßankbythePrussians,werecalledupontosur-Theofferwasrefused,buttheofferwasmadeinconformitywithestablishedpracticeandnotionsofhonourableconduct.ThispracticecarriedoverevenintotheSecondWorldWar,forexample,duringthebattleofArnhem,whentheoutnumberedandoutgunneddetachmentofBritishparatroopsdefendingthetenuouslyheldcrucialbridgeovertheRhine,wereofferedthechancetosurrenderbeforethemainassaultcommenced.Liketheotherexample,thisoffertoowasrejected,butintheensuinghardÞghting,capturedBritishÔÔparasÕÕweregenerallytreatedhumanelyandwithrespect,havingearneditintheeyesoftheiradversariesbytheirtenaciousdefenceandgeneraladherencetotherulesofwar.Ifsurrenderwasaccepted,itwasalmostalwaysrespectedandwasoftenaccompaniedbytermsallowingfornotonlyrespectforthelivesofthecaptured, ,p.191.LachouqueandBrown,pp.488,489.,p.222.T.Gill butoftenincludingsomedegreeofrespectforthehonouranddignityofthedefeatedparty.TwoexampleswillhavetosufÞcetoillustratethepoint.ThesurrenderofBritishGeneralBurgoyneatSaratogain1777,generallyconsideredastheturningpointintheAmericanRevolutionaryWar,wascarriedoutwithfullrespectforthetermsagreedandbothsidesshowedscrupulousattentiontotheÔÔhonoursofwarÕÕ.IntheÞnalstagesoftheCrimeanWar,whilepeacenegoti-ationswereunderwaytosurrenderthefortressofSevastopolandendthewar,FrenchandRussiantroopswhohadfacedeachotherovermonthsofgruellingtrenchandsiegewarfarefraternised,sharedrationsandexchangedgiftsoftobaccoandsmallitems,whiletheofÞcersexchangedvisitsandmutualcomplimentsandcourtesies.Insomecasessuchexpressionsofmutualrespectatsurrendercouldhavefar-reachingconsequences,aswasthecaseintheAmericanCivilWarinrelationtothesurrenderatAppomattoxbyGeneralLee,commandingtheCon-federateArmy,toGeneralGrant,commandingtheUnionArmy,withthetermsofsurrenderofferedandthewayitwasconducted,contributinginnosmallmeasuretoafairlysmoothtransformationtopeaceandreconciliationbetweenthetwoConsiderationsofmutualrespectandchivalryhavealsobeenobservedwithregardtothefallenofopposingarmiesformanycenturies.AlexanderfollowedtheGreektraditionofburyingthedeadofbothsidesafterabattleanderectingamemorialtothefallenandthesametraditionwasobservedbytheGermancommanderatSt.NazairefollowingadaringBritishcommandoraidin1942,whichputthedocksintendedtohousethebattleshipTirpitzoutofaction.Inthatcase,theGermanCommanderorderedthatthe169commandoswhohadfallenintheactionbeburiedwithfullmilitaryhonoursandmountedanhonourguardatthecemeteryinrecognitionoftheirbravery.Whileexamplessuchasthesedonottakeawayfromtheviolenceornegatethehorrorandcrueltyofwar,theydoillustratethatalongsidetheseelementsthereisroomforsomedegreeofmutualdecencyandrespectbetweenadversariesandthenotionofchivalryandmartialhonourhasplayedsomepartincontributingtothis.ItformedpartofÔÔthecodeofthewarriorÕÕandhadanundeniableinßuenceuponthedevelopmentofÔÔthelawsandcustomsofwarÕÕ.Wewillnowturntothequestionwhetheritactuallycontinuestoformpartofthecontemporarylaw. ,pp.196,197.,p.409.AndersonandAnderson,pp.448Ð454.,p.46.WeiderHistoryGroup2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?39 2.3ChivalryandHonourableConductasPartoftheLawofWarThelawofwar,likeanyotherbranchofinternationallaw,isbasedonthesourcesenumeratedinArticle38oftheStatuteoftheInternationalCourtofJustice.Thetwoprimarysourcesaremultilateralconventions,suchasthoseofGenevaandTheHague,andcustomarylawrepresentingpracticerecognisedaslegallybinding.Alongsidethesearegeneralprinciplesoflaw,andassecondarysources,decisionsofcourtsandtribunalsanddoctrine.Theplaceandfunctionofgeneralprincipleswithinthissystemhasbeenthesubjectofsomecontroversy,butitisgenerallyagreedthatprinciplesoflawcanincludebothfundamentalnormsofinternationallawofamoregeneralnaturethanspeciÞcrules,includingsomenormsofaperemptorynature,andelementsofmunicipallawcommontomostoralllegalsystemswhichcanhaverelevanceforinternationallaw.Thecontemporarylawofarmedconßictconsistsofhundredsoftreatyprovi-sionsandaccordingtotheICRCcustomarylawstudy,over160rulesofcustomaryAssuchithasbecomeacomplexandhighlydetailedbranchorsub-disciplineofinternationallaw,andwhilemostofitsrulesarereasonablyuncon-troversial,somearethesubjectofdiverginginterpretationandelementsofitsrelationshiptootherareasofinternationallaw,suchashumanrightslaw,havegivenrisetoaconsiderabledegreeofcontroversy.Onemightquestionhowanindividualsoldier,orevenacommander,couldeverbeexpectedtoknowalloftherulesorÞndhisorherwaythroughthecontroversiesandgreyareas.Theansweristhat,whilethedetailofthelawiscomplexandsometimescontroversial,itsessenceiscontainedinahandfuloffundamentalprincipleswhichareinterrelatedandformasystem,whichhavebeenrecognisedthroughoutitslonghistoryandwhichformthefoundationforalltherulescontainedinthetwoprimarysourcesoftreatyandcustom.Theseprinciplesprovidethenormativeframeworkuponwhichtheentiresystemofrulesisbasedandcanadditionallyserveasaidsininterpre-tationandasameanstoÞllgapsandensurecoherence.Theyunderlieandprovidethenormativebasisforeverysingleruleoftreatyandcustomarylawandassuch,whilenotnormallyusedtoidentifyspeciÞcrightsorobligations,areoffunda-mentalimportanceintheinterpretationandapplicationoftherulescontainedintheprimarysources.Theyareinshort,generalprinciplesofinternationallawinthesenseoffundamentalnormsofamoregeneralcharacterreferredtoabove.Thefundamentalprinciplesofmilitarynecessityandhumanityarethetwokeystoneprincipleswhichlieattheheartofthebalancebetweenmilitaryrequirementsandtheneedandobjectivetolimitthesufferinganddevastationcausedbywarandprovideprotectiontothosemostvulnerable,suchasthe VanHoof,pp.148Ð151.HenckaertsandDoswald-BeckMilitarymanualsonthelawofarmedconßictsuchasthosecitedinn.2,usuallybeginwithatreatmentofthebasicprinciplesofthelawofarmedconßict.T.Gill woundedandcaptured,andtothecivilianpopulation.Thesetwomainprinciplesarecomplementedbyseveralotherfundamentalprincipleswhicharedrawnfromthetwomainonesandwhichcomplementtheminformingtheoverallsystem.Theseincludetheprincipleofdistinction,whichhasthefunctionofdemarcatingwhoandwhatis,andisnot,subjecttoattack;theprincipleofproportionality()whichsetsoutabalancebetweenexpectedmilitaryadvantageandprobableincidentalinjuryanddamagetociviliansandcivilianobjectsinconductingattacksuponmilitarytargets;theprincipleofprohibitionofunnecessarysufferingandsuperßuousinjuryintheuseofcertaintypesofweaponsandmeansofcombatasasub-principleofhumanity;andtheprincipleofequalapplication,whichestab-lishesanequalitybetweenopposingforcesandparticipantsintheapplicationofthelawofwar,irrespectiveofconsiderationsofthelegalityofresortingtoforcebetweenStatesorthemotivationsoftheopposingparties.Thequestionposedearlieriswhethertheseprinciplesalsoincludeconsider-ationsofchivalryandhonourableconduct,whetherintheformofaseparateprinciple,oraspartofthosenamedabove.Clearly,notallofwhatis(orperhapsmoreaccuratelywas)regardedaschivalryormartialhonourhasbeencodiÞedintolaw,butthereisnodoubtthatsigniÞcantelementshavefoundtheirwayintotreatyandcustomarylawandassuchrepresentbindinglegalobligations.Otherelementsremainmoreaquestionofmilitarytraditionorethicsthanpositivelegalobliga-tions,butneverthelessexertsomedegreeofinßuence.Wewillexamineafewexamplesofbothbywayofillustration.ThoseelementswhicharethesourceofbindinglegalobligationscontainedinconventionsandcustomwillbeexaminedÞrst,followedbyanexaminationinthenextparagraphoftheancillaryroleofbasiclegalprinciplesingeneralandchivalryinparticular,assourcesofguidancewhichcananddoincludeextralegalconsiderationsandpracticesandtraditionswhich,whilenotlegallybinding,canneverthelessexertasigniÞcantinßuence.OneareawherenotionsofhonourableconducthavebecomepartofthelawisintheprohibitionofperÞdy.Thisrelatestotheprohibitionoffeigningwoundedorotherwiseprotectedstatus,aswellastheintenttosurrender,asameansofgainingadvantageincombat.TheHagueRegulationsonLandWarfareof1907andAdditionalProtocolIof1977laydownstrictprohibitionsofusingtreachery(perÞdy)tokillorwound(andunderAPItocapture)membersoftheopposingarmedforceortomisuseßagsoftruce,nationalßags,uniformsandemblemsoftheenemyorthoseofneutralStatesincombatortomisusetheprotectedemblemsandsignsoftheGenevaConventions.Theseprohibitionshaveobtainedacus-tomarystatusandextendedsomewhattoinclude,forexample,theßaganddis-tinctiveemblemoftheUnitedNationsandformpartofcustomarylaw;violation Convention(IV)respectingtheLawsandCustomsofWaronLandanditsannex:RegulationsconcerningtheLawsandCustomsofWaronLand(HereinafterHR1907),TheHague,18October1907,Article23Bjo.Article23F;Protocol(I)AdditionaltotheGenevaConventionsof12August1949andrelatingtotheProtectionofVictimsofInternationalArmedConßicts(HereinafterAPI),Geneva,8June1977,UnitedNationsTreatySeries,VolumeNumber75,Articles37Ð39.2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?41 ofwhichcanbeconsideredtoconstituteawarcrime.Theseprohibitionsundoubtedlyhavetheirrootinnotionsofmartialhonourandchivalry,whichrequiredadversariestoÞghtopenlyandwithouttreachery.Thesameconsiderationappliestotheprohibitionofattackingindividualswhohavelaiddowntheirarmsandsurrenderedatdiscretion.Notonlyisattackingpersonswhohavesurren-deredaviolationofbasichumanity,itisnolessaviolationoftrustanddishon-ourableconducttoattackapersonwhohasyieldedandplacedhimselfatthedisposaloftheopponent.Nohonourablewarriorinthechivalrictraditionwouldattackanopposingwarriorwhohadyieldedandaskedforquarter.Thisalsounderliestheprohibitionofdenyingquarteranddeclaringnoquarterwillbegranted,orconductinghostilitiesinsuchamannerastomakesurrenderimpossible.Anotherelementofchivalryandhonourableconductwhichisincorporatedintothelawistheprohibitionofusingprotectedpersonsandobjectsasshieldsfromattackorindirectsupportofmilitaryoperations.Protectedpersonssuchasciv-ilians,thewoundedandprisonersofwararetobeseparatedfromcombatantsasfaraspossibleandclearlyindicatedforwhattheyare.Usingtheirimmunityfromattackasashieldformilitaryoperationsnotonlyviolatestheirprotectedstatusandrendersthemsubjecttolossofprotection,therebyviolatingboththeprinciplesofhumanityanddistinction,butisalsowithoutdoubtaformofdishonourableandtreacherousconductakintomisuseofßagsandemblems.Thesameappliestotheuseofspeciallyprotectedobjects,suchasplacesofworship,hospitalsandculturalmonumentsasshieldsfromattack.AnotherexampleofhownotionsofchivalryandhonourableconducthavefoundtheirwayintobindinglegalprovisionsisinrulesrelatingtotheinviolabilityofparlementairesandrespectforßagsoftruceandforceaseÞresandarmistices,forexample,tonegotiatetermsofsurrenderortopermitcollectionandtreatmentofthewounded,orevacuationofnon-combatants.Theserulesoftreatyandcustomarebasedonlong-standingpracticesintheconductofwarfareandhavetheirrootinnotionsofchivalryandmartialhonourasreferredtoabove.ThislikewiseappliestothemannerinwhichcapitulationsaretobecarriedoutandobservedÔÔinaccordancewiththerulesofmilitaryhonourÕÕandtheconcomitantrequirementthatÔÔoncetermshavebeensettledtheymustbescrupulouslyobservedÕÕ.AÞnalexampleofhowelementsofchivalryandmilitaryhonourhavefoundtheirwayintothelawistobefoundincertainoftheprovisionsrelatingtothe API,Ibid.,Article38:2;RomeStatuteoftheInternationalCriminalCourt,Rome,17July1998,U.N.Doc.A/CONF.183/9,Article8,para2(b),vii.HR1907,note27,Article23C.,pp.115Ð137at126,127.HR1907,note27,Article23D;API,note27,Article40.API,note27,Article51:7.HR1907,note27,Article35.T.Gill treatmentofprisonersofwar.Prisonersofwarareallowedtoweartheiruniforms,badgesofrankandnationality,decorationsandretainpersonalitems,includingmoneyandobjectsofvalue(withincertainconditions).Theseruleshavetodowithrespectforthemilitaryhonourofthecapturedpersonnelandfunctionalongsideprovisionsrelatingtoprohibitionofviolence,cruelty,mistreatmentandinsulttonotonlysafeguardtheirwell-being,butalsotosetthemapartfromconvictsandpersonssuspectedofcriminaloffences.TheyaretoobservemilitaryprotocolandrespectinmatterssuchassalutingonlyofÞcersofhigherrankandofÞcersandprisonersofequivalentstatusandreceivinginturntherecognitionofrespectduetotheirrankandstatus.Theinternalhierarchyand(military)cus-tomsofthecapturedpersonnelisgenerallyrecognisedandrespectedinsofarasitisnotprejudicialtosecurityandgoodorder,withtherankingofÞcerornon-commissionedofÞceramongtheprisonersnormallyservingasPOWrepresenta-tivetothecampcommander.TheyaresubjecttothemilitarydisciplinarysystemofthedetainingpowerwiththesamerightsandobligationsasmembersofitsownTheabove-mentionedexamplesofrulesandthepracticeswhichunderliethemhavetheirrootinnotionsofchivalry,militaryhonourandmutualrespectwhichformpartofmilitarytradition.Whiletheseexamplesarenotexhaustive,theydoservetoillustratehowmanyelementsofchivalryandhonourableconduct,alongsidemilitarytraditionrelatingtothesenotions,havebeenincorporatedintobindinglegalrulesofthelawofwar.Assuch,chivalryandhonourableconductcanqualifyasafundamentalprincipleofthelawofwarfromwhichrulesandprohibitionsofabindinglegalnaturearederived.Whetheroneseesitasaseparatefundamentalprinciplealongsidemilitarynecessity,humanity,distinctionandproportionality,orasbeingincorporatedintothese,islessimportantthanthefactthatitexercisesthefunctionthatallofthesefundamentalprinciplesdoasthefoundationuponwhichpositivelegalobligationscontainedintreatyprovisionsandcustomarebased.2.3.1ChivalryasaGuidingPrincipleWhathasbeensaidaboveinrelationtotheincorporationofelementsofchivalryandhonourableconductintopositivelegalobligationsshouldnotobscurethefactthatnotallofitselements,especiallymanynotionsofmartialhonourderivingfrommilitarytradition,arenecessarilyÔÔlawÕÕinthesenseofconstitutingpositiverightsandobligations.However,thefunctionsofageneralprinciplearenotonlyto Convention(III)relativetotheTreatmentofPrisonersofWar(HereinafterGCIII),Geneva,12August1949,UnitedNationsTreatySeries,VolumeNumber75,Publication/UNTS/Volume%2075/volume-75-I-972-English.pdf.Articles27,39,40,43Ð45.GCIII,Ibid.,Articles22:3,82:1,87:1.2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?43 serveasabasisforspeciÞcrulesandobligations,butasameansofaidingintheinterpretationofsuchexistingobligationsandÞllinggapswheretheseexist.Inthissense,principlesoflawarelegaltoolswhichaidandcomplementspeciÞcrulescontainedintreatiesandcustomarylaw.WhileprinciplesarerarelycitedincourtdecisionsasasourceofspeciÞcobligation,theyaresometimesreferredtointhesenseofnotingagenericobligation,suchasisthecasewiththewell-knownÔÔMartensClauseÕÕ,orasanassistininterpretingspeciÞcrules.Inawidersense,generalprinciplescanalsorefertoextralegalconsiderations,whichfunctionalongsidethelawinastrictlypositivesense,asameansofreg-ulatingconductanddenotingobligationsofamoralorethicalcharacterwhichhaveaplacealongsidethebindingrulesoflaw.Noaspectofhumanbehaviour,includingwarfare,issimplyaquestionoflegalrightsandprohibitions,importantastheseare.Behaviourinwarasinpeaceisalsoregulatedbyconsiderationsofmorality,trust,courtesyandtradition,aswellasonthebasisofconsiderationsofpolicyandgoodsense.Thisappliesinamoregeneralsenseaswell.Forexample,whiletheconceptofequityispartofthelawinmostlegalsystems,thebroadernotionofÔÔfairnessÕÕ,fromwhichequityislargelyderived,includesbothlegalandextralegalconsiderationsandassuchismorethanjustapurelylegalnotion.CertainlegalrulesmaybeperfectlyÔÔlegalÕÕinthesenseofbeinglegallybindingandhavingbeenadoptedinaccordancewithestablishedprocedure,however,thisdoesnotguaranteetheywillinevitablybeÔÔfairÕÕinallcircumstancesinthesenseofprovidingtherightoutcomeanddoingjusticetoallconcerned.whilelawandfundamentalnotionsofmoralitygenerallycoincidetoaconsider-ableextent,thisisnotinevitablythecase,norisitalwayspossible,orperhapsdesirableinallsituations,particularlyincaseswheremoralityisequallyÔÔgreyÕÕorcontestedjustaslawsometimesis.Itcanbehighlydangeroustoallowindividualnotionsofmoralitytoprevailoverlegalconsiderations,sincethelatternormallyrepresentacommunisopinioofwhatisacceptableconductandwhatisanacceptableresponsetomisconduct,ratherthanoneÕsownprivatesenseofwhatisÔÔrightÕÕorÔÔwrongÕÕ.Nevertheless,thereisstillaplace,indeedaneed,forextralegalconsiderationsasameansofgoverningconductalongsidepositivelegalobligations,asacomplementarymeansofregulatingconduct.Inalmostallcases,intheeventofaclashbetweenpositivelegalobligationsandthoseofanextralegalcharacter,theformerwillprevailatthelevelofsocietyatlarge(ifnotalwaysattheindividuallevel),althoughmostlegalsystemswilltakeaccountofnon-legalconsiderationsandethicalmotivationstoatleastsomeextentin VanHoof,pp.144Ð146.ForexampleinICJ,LegalityoftheThreatofUseofNuclearWeapons,AdvisoryOpinion,GeneralListNo.95,8July1996,I.C.J.Reports1996,http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/Þles/95/,p.226,para78atp.257.ForanextensivetreatmentofÔÔfairnessÕÕasbothalegalandoverarchingethicalprinciple,see,Chapters1and2.AmodernclassicdealingwiththeethicaldimensionofwarisMichealWalzerÕsJustandUnjustWars,WalzerT.Gill apportioningblameanddeterminingtheconsequencesofunlawfulbehaviour.Thenotionofperemptorynormsofaiuscogensnatureisaninstrumentwhichbringstogether,toalargeextent,theconceptsoflaw,justiceandmorality,andmanyoftherulesandfundamentalprinciplesofthelawofwarconstitutesuchuniversallybindingobligations,buteventhesedonotcoverallpossiblesituationsandcontingencies.Whatdoesallofthishavetodowithchivalry,onemightask?Theanswermaylieinthisancillaryfunctionofgeneralprinciplesoflaw(andconduct)ingeneralsenseasaguidingprinciplealongsidethelaw,andapossiblecomplementaryroleorfunctionofchivalryandhonourableconductinparticular.Anexamplemayservetoillustratewhatthisfunctionmightbe.IntheongoingcontroversyrelatingtoÔÔDirectParticipationinHostilitiesÕÕ,oneofthemostcontentiousissueshasbeenthepurportedeffectoftheprincipleofmilitarynecessityasanadditionalrestraintupontheconductofhostilities,withonesideoftheargumentcontendingthat,inadditiontotherulesofhumanitarianlawandwithoutprejudicetotheapplicabilityofotherbodiesofinternationallaw(i.e.humanrightslaw),hostilitiesarealsolimitedtowhatisstrictlyrequiredunderthecircumstances,leadingtoanadditionallegalobligationtocaptureenemypersonnelratherthantargetthemincombatsituationswhenthisisnotstrictlyrequiredbytherulesofInternationalhumanitarianlaw.ThisisÞercelycontestedbyasigniÞcantnumberofexpertsinthehumanitarianlawofarmedconßictwhoarguethattheconstraintsonattackscannotbederivedfromgeneralprinciplesandarecontainedintherulesthemselves,andthatthereisafortiorinolegalobligationtocapturepersonssubjecttoattack,ratherthantargetthemintheconductofhostilities.WithoutpronouncingeithersideinthiscontentiontobeeitherÔÔrightÕÕorÔÔwrongÕÕ,Ibelieveapossiblesolutionlieselsewhere,namelyinlookingfortheinßuenceofchivalryandmilitarytradition,notsomuchinthesenseofaguidinglegalprinciple,butasanextralegalconsideration,whichhaslongplayedaroleinthewaybattlesandengagementsareconductedwhencircumstancesandcondi-tionspermit.ThereisalongtraditionofofferingsurrenderasanÔÔhonourablealternativeÕÕtohopelessresistanceinsituationsofoverwhelmingsuperiority,whichhasbeenreferredtopreviously.Whilepartofthishaslongbeenpartofthelaw,inthesenseofrequiringquarterbegrantedwhensurrenderisoffered,thereisnostrictlyrequirementtooffersurrendertoanoutnumbered,outgunnedorsurroundedadversarywhohasnorealisticoptionofprevailingorescapingintact,buthasnot(yet)indicatedtheintentiontosurrender.Thisisneitherapartofthelawnow,norhasiteverbeenso.Nevertheless,thishasalongtraditioninthepracticeofadversariesonthebattleÞeld,andwhileitisnotamatterofthewar,itcouldbesaidtobepartoftheofwarinanon-legal,butnoless VanHoof,pp.153Ð156.,ChapterIX;Forcriticismseeinteralia,Watkin,andHaysandthereplytheretobyMelzer2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?45 persuasivesense.Itisnotderivedfromanadditionallegalconstraintontheconductofhostilitiesemanatingfromtheprinciplesofmilitarynecessity,orhumanity,butratherfromatraditionandcustomwhichhasitsrootsinchivalryandÔÔfairplayÕÕbetweenadversaries.Unlikelegalobligationsunderthecontem-porarylawofarmedconßict,itislargelyamatterofreciprocityinthesenseofhonourandrespectforadversarieswhohaveconductedthemselvesbravelyandinaccordancewiththerulesandcustomsofwar,aswellasfromasenseofsharingthesamedangers.Itßowsadditionallyfromasenseofbasichumanity;humanityherenotinthesenseofabindinglegalrule,butasaconsiderationofmoralityandethics.Viewedinthisway,therearefewmilitaryofÞcerswhowoulddenytheexis-tenceofsuchatraditionordenythatwhencircumstancespermit,itwouldbethehonourableandÔÔdecentÕÕthingtodotoofferanadversaryafairchancetosur-renderratherthanÞghtonhopelesslyandneedlesslysacriÞcelives.Ofcourse,sincethiscustomisbasedlargelyonmutualrespect,itishardtoimaginesuchanofferbeingmadetoanadversarywhichhadnotfoughthonourablyandwhoinsteadhadusedeveryopportunitytoviolatethelawandcustomofwarfare.Nevertheless,eveninsuchcircumstances,considerationsofethics,alongsidethoseofpolicy(forexample,counterinsurgencydoctrineposesrestraintsonhostilitieswhichcangowellbeyondwhatisrequiredasamatteroflegalobligation),mightwellmilitateinfavourofmoderation.Regardlessofwhetheroneactedoutofasenseofmoralobligation,mutualrespectandsenseofhonourorpolicy;itwouldnotbeaquestionofbindinglegalobligation,butamatterofeithermoralityandchivalry,orgoodsenseandexpediency,whichactedasarestraintinsituationswhereoneenjoyedoverwhelmingsuperiorityandofferedanadversarytheoptionofsurrender.Suchrestraintscouldwellhavethesameeffectinmanycases,withoutcausingthelevelofcontroversythathasresultedoverthepurportedbindingnatureofobligationsnotcontainedinpositiverulesoflaw.Theywouldactasacomplementtobindinglegalobligations,alsobasedonacombinationofconsiderationsofchivalryandhumanity(nowaspartofthelaw),whichprohibitdenialofquarterandconductinghostilitiesonthebasisofÔÔtakingnoprisonersÕÕwhensurrenderisoffered.ThereisaÞnelinebetweenlegalandextralegalconsiderations,buttheyaredistinct.Violationofalegalobligation,carrieswithitlegalresponsibilityandpossibletrialandconvictionforcommissionofawarcrime,whiletheotherdoesnot.Nevertheless,non-bindingmoralobligationsandtraditionscanalsoactasapowerfulincentiveforparticularconductandarenolessrelevantfornothavingalegalsanctionattachedtothem.2.4ChivalryÕsRelevanceandLimitsinWarfareTheexampleoftheroleofchivalryinrelationtothecontroversysurroundingtheroleofbasicprinciplesinrelationtothequestionofdirectparticipationinhos-tilitiesillustrateshowchivalryandhonourableconductisbothpartofthelawinT.Gill thesenseofbeingpartlyincorporatedintobindingrules,inthiscaserelatingtothedutytoacceptsurrenderwhenoffered,whileatthesametimeactingasaguidingprinciplewhichhasalegalfunctioninassistingtheinterpretationofspeciÞcrulesandanextralegaldimensionalongsidethelawasareßectionofpracticeandmilitarytradition,forexample,inofferinganadversarywhichhasnoprospectofsuccessfulresistanceorescapeachancetosurrender.ItalsoisanindicationthatchivalryisbothageneralprincipleofthelawuponwhichspeciÞcrulesarebasedaswellasaprincipleofthecustomorpracticeofwarfareinanon-legalsense.Itprovidesagoodcaseforillustratingitscontinuedrelevance,evenincontemporarywarfarebetweenmismatchedopponentsintermsofcapabilities,motivationandmethodsofÞghting,atleastinsomecircumstances.Whilethisdoesnotsignifythatconsiderationsofchivalrywillalwaysdeter-minethewayinwhichadversariesconductthemselves,itdoesshowthatsuchconsiderationscanhaverelevanceevennow.ItshouldbeborneinmindthateveninÔÔclassicalwarfareÕÕbetweenreasonablylike-mindedopponentspittedagainsteachotherinfacetofacebattles,chivalryneverdeterminedtheoutcome,nordiditpreventtheintensiveuseofforceandviolencetoachievethedesiredoutcome(eighteenthandnineteenthcenturybattleÞeldswereÔÔkillingÞeldsÕÕbytodayÕsstandards).Likewise,itneverpreventedtheuseofweaponsandtacticsaimedatnegatingtheadvantageoftheopposingsideasawholeorofneutralisingthesuperioritytheadversarypossessedinacertainarmofthearmyormethodofÞghting.ArcherswereusedtomowdownmountedknightsatCrecyandAgin-court,justasmassedvolleyÞresmashedtheassaultofNapoleonÕscavalryandeliteinfantryatWaterloo,andguerrillatacticsanddeceptionhavebeenusedthroughoutwarfarebyaweakeropponentagainstastrongeronetoneutralisetheirsuperiorityinopenengagements.(Longrange)missilewarfare,whetherbymeansofballista,longorcrossbow,musket,artillery,machinegunorsniperriße(orforthatmatterhelicoptergunshipsormissilearmedunmannedaerialvehiclesorÔÔdronesÕÕ),hasbeenpartofwarfareforcenturiesandistheÔÔgreatlevellerÕÕ,makingnodistinctionbetweenrank,class,skillorbraveryoftherecipients.SuperiorÞrepowerhasalsolongbeenusedtoneutralisesuperiorskill,locationormobilitypossessedbyanadversaryas,forexample,intheuseofaerialsupremacybytheAlliesintheirbreakoutfromNormandyin1944,oritsusebyUSforcesintheÞghtinginVietnam.Inshort,chivalryandmartialhonourhaveneverpre-cludedmaximisingoneÕsadvantagesandneutralisingthoseoftheopponent,exceptinsofarascertainconduct(e.g.perÞdy)orweaponry(e.g.poison)hasbeenbannedasillegal.Thishasnot,however,preventeditfromexertinganinßuenceonthewaywarwasconductedandinducingadegreeofrestraintandmutualrespectbetweenadversariesinsofarasthiswasfeasibleandnotincompatiblewithmilitaryrequirementsunderthecircumstances. ForacomprehensivestudyofhowtheelementsofÞrepower,manoeuvreandmobilityinteractedinWesternmilitaryhistoryfromancienttomodernwarfareseeJones2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?47 Doesthisstillholdtruetoday?Cannotionsofchivalryandhonourableconductstillhaverelevanceinthecontextofpostmodernasymmetricalwarfare?Theanswertothisis,inmyview,aqualiÞedÔÔyesÕÕ.Onthenegativesideoftheledgerareseveralconsiderations,including:amuchgreatergapincapabilitybetweenmodernwellequippedarmedforcesontheonehandandtheirincreasinglylikelyopponentsontheother,acorrespondinggreaterdisregardbymostnon-Statearmedgroupsforthelawsofwar(muchlessforextralegalnotionsofchivalryandhonourableconduct)thanintraditionalengagementsbetweenregulararmedfor-ces,andtheinßuenceofextremistideology,religionandethnichatred,alongwithextremereactionstheretointheformofbendingorviolatingtherulesandcon-ventionsofwarfareasbothameansofpunishmentandasaformofexpediencytoovercome(perceived)disadvantagesposedbythedisregardoflegalandmoralrestraintsbymanysuchnon-Statearmedgroups.Putsimply,manywouldquestionwhyoneshouldÞghtinaccordancewithnotionsofchivalryandhonour,oreveninaccordancewiththelawsofwaragainstafoewhichhasnoregardforthemandroutinelyviolatesthelawofwar,indeedsometimesusesitasameansofgainingamilitaryorpropagandaadvantage.Onthepositivesideoftheledgeristhefactthatthelawofwarhasobtainedadegreeofacceptance,authorityanduniversalitythathasmadeitaninescapablepartoftodayÕsperceptionofwhatisminimallyrequiredconductinarmedconßict.Thisincludesthoserulesandprincipleswhichhavetheirrootsinchivalryandhonourableconduct,someofwhichwerereferredtoabove.Anotherfactoristhefactthat,notwithstandingtheabove-mentionednegativeconsiderationsrelatingtomuchofcontemporarywarfarealongsidetheinherentlimitationsofchivalryinrelationtomaximisationofadvantageinweaponsandtacticswhichhavealwaysexisted,therearecompellinglegal,moralandpolicyreasonsforconductingoneselfhonourablyirrespectiveofwhethertheothersidedoesso.Fromalegalstandpoint,adherencetothelawisrequired,regardlessofwhethertheopponentdoessoornot.Fromamoralstandpoint,disregardoflawandindeedofextralegalconsiderationsofbasichumanityandhonourableconductstripstheviolatoroftherighttocondemntheconductoftheadversaryandriskssacriÞcingtheveryvaluesoneisdefending.Fromapolicystandpoint,respectforthelaw,fairnessandhonourableconductwillstrengthenmoraleandsenseofpurposeamongtheforcesengagedandwillsigniÞcantlystrengthendomesticandinternationalacceptanceoftheuseofforceandthewayitisemployed.Insum,whilethereareundeniablechallengestothelawandtoconductingwarfareinaccordancewithnotionsofchivalryandhonourableconduct,incon-temporarywarfaretherearecompellingreasonstodosodespitethem.Suchchallengeshavealwaysexistedinoneformoranotherandsomeofthemarenotasnewasissometimessupposed(irregular/asymmetricalwarfareandeventheuseofterrortacticsaspsychologicalwarfare,forexample,arenothingnew).Adherencetothelawandtoethicalandotherprinciples,suchasmilitaryhonour,arebothrequiredfromalegalandethicalstandpointandmoreoverdonotpreventorsigniÞcantlyhinderachievingtheobjectiveofwar,whichis,asitalwayshasbeenÔÔtowinÕÕ.Onthecontrary,theycanmakeasigniÞcantcontributiontoachievingT.Gill oneÕsobjectivesbothinanarrowsenseofachievingmilitaryobjectives(forexample,treatingprisonershumanelyandhonourably,notonlyistheÔÔrightÕÕthingtodo,butmakesitmorelikelythatanadversarywillsurrenderwhensuccessfulresistanceisnolongerpossible,therebysavinglivesandresourcesofoneÕsownside)andinawidersenseofadheringtofundamentalnotionsofdecency,humanityandfairnesswhicharewhatoneisultimatelyÞghtingtopreserve.Adherencetochivalryandhonourableconductmayalsowellcontributetoachievingareconciliationbetweenformeradversariesoncehostilitieshavebeenconcluded.2.5ConclusionsOurshortexaminationofthenotionsofchivalryandhonourableconductleadstoanumberofconclusions.Firstly,chivalryandmartialhonourhavealwaysbeenpartoftheÔÔthecodeofthewarriorÕÕandhaveplayedasigniÞcantroleinthedevel-opmentofthelawofwar.Secondly,theyhavebeenincorporatedintonumerousbindingrulesoftreatyandcustomarylawandassuchperformthefunctionofageneralprincipleoflaw,whichincludethefundamentalprinciplesofthelawofwarasanormativeframeworkandabasisuponwhichspeciÞcobligationsarebased.Thirdly,thatasafundamentalprincipleofthelawofwar,theyperformanotherofthefunctionsofageneralprincipleoflaw,namelyasameanstoassistintheinterpretationofthelawandasaguidingprincipleinbothalegalandinawidersenseofincorporatingextralegalconsiderationsofethicsandmilitarytraditionintothepracticeofwarfare.Onthebasisoftheseconclusions,itseemsfairtosaythatchivalryandhonourableconductarestillaprincipleofthelawofarmedconßictandcanhaverelevanceincontemporarywarfare,notwithstandingundeniableobstaclesandchallengestotheirapplication.Oneareawherethesedifferentfunctionsofchivalryoperateasabasicprincipleofthelawofarmedconßictandasaguidingprinciplewhichtakesaccountofextralegalconsiderationsofanethicalandpolicynatureaswellasincorporatinglong-standingmilitarypracticeandtraditionisinrelationtothecontroversysur-roundingthequestionwhethertheprincipleofmilitarynecessityprovidesforlegalrestraintsinadditiontoobligationscontainedintreatiesandcustom;speciÞcallyinrelationtothequestionwhetheralegalobligationexiststocaptureratherthantargetanenemycombatantorÞghterdirectlyparticipatinginhostilitiesundercertaincircumstances.Ihavearguedthatthesolutiontothiscontroversymaylieinthedoubleroleofchivalry,bothasafoundationforpositivelegalobligationsprohibitingdenialofquarterandthedutytonotconducthostilitiesinamannerwhichprecludessurvivorsbeingtakenprisoner,andasaguidingprinciplebasedonethicalconsiderationsandlong-standingmilitarypracticeandtradition,wherebyanadversarywhohasnofeasiblechanceofsuccessfulresistanceisofferedachancetosurrender.2Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?49 Theprofessionofarmshasalwaysincludedconsiderationsofhonourintheconductingofhostilitiesandtreatmentofadefeatedorhelplessadversaryandpersonsnotunderarms,alongsideconsiderationsofbasichumanityandmilitarynecessity.Therearenocompellingreasonstoconcludethatthishasfundamentallychangedincontemporarywarfare,orthatitoughttochangeasaresultofchangedtechnologyorlackofadherencetosuchconsiderationsbymanyadversaries.Chivalryandhonourableconductinthiscontextarenotaboutromanticnotionsofcourtlybehaviourandjoustingonhorsebacktowinthefavourofafairlady,butratherarepartoftheprofessionalandethicalcodeofanymemberofthearmedforces,aswellasbeingpartofthelawofwaraslongasithasexisted.OfÞcialDocumentsBritishManual(1958)Britishmanualofmilitarylaw.TheLawofWar,volIII.UnitedKingdomMinistryofDefence,HMSO(1958)CanadianJointForcesManual(2001)CanadianJointForcesmanualontheLawofArmedConßict,B-GJ-005-104/FP-021ICRC(2008)InterpretiveguidanceonthenotionofdirectparticipationinhostilitiesunderInternationalHumanitarianLaw,adoptedbytheAssemblyoftheInternationalCommitteeoftheRedCrosson26Feb2009,90IRRC,No.872(Dec2008),pp991Ð1047UKManual(2004)JointServiceManualoftheLawofArmedConßict.JointServicesPublication383,UnitedKingdomMinistryofDefenceUSArmyManual(1956)USArmymanuallawoflandwarfare,FM27-101956USNavy(1997)USNavy,annotatedsupplementtothecommanderÕshandbookoftheLawofNavalOperations,NWP9(REVA)/FMFM1-101997USNavy(2007)USNavy,MarineCorpsandCoastGuardCommanderÕshandbookontheLawofNavalOperations,NWP1-14MAckermanF(2003)ÔÔNevertodooutrageousitynormurderÕÕ:theworldofMaloryÕsMorteDarthur.In:FrenchS(ed)Codeofthewarrior:exploringwarriorvaluespastandpresent.RowmanandLittleÞedPublishers,Lanham,pp115Ð137AndersonN,AndersonD(1988)Thegenerals:UlyssesS.GrantandRobertE.Lee.AlfredA.KnopfPublishers,NewYorkFigesO(2010)Crimea.PenguinBooks,LondonFranckT(1995)Fairnessininternationallawandinstitutions.OxfordUniversityPress,OxfordFrenchS(2003)Codeofthewarrior:exploringwarriorvaluespastandpresent.Rowman&LittleÞeldPublishers,Lanham,MarylandGillT(2007)HetHaagsLandoorlogreglementna100jaar(TheHagueRegulationsonLandWarfareafter100years).MededelingenvandeNederlandseVerenigingvoorInternationaalRecht135:71T.Gill GreenL(2000)Thecontemporarylawofarmedconßict,2ndedn.ManchesterUniversityPress,GreenwoodC(2008)Historicaldevelopmentandlegalbasis.In:FleckD,BotheM(eds)Thehandbookofinternationalhumanitarianlaw,2ndedn.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,pp1Ð43HaysParksW(2010)PartIXoftheICRCÔÔDirectparticipationinhostilitiesÕÕstudy:nomandate,noexpertiseandlegallyincorrect.NYUJIntÕlL&Pol42:769HenckaertsJ-M,Doswald-BeckL(2005)Customaryinternationalhumanitarianlaw:Rules,ICRC,volI.CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.HibbertC(1990)Redcoatsandrebels:themericanrevolutionthroughBritisheyes.AvonBooks,NewYorkHowardM(1976)WarinEuropeanhistory.OxfordUniversityPress,OxfordJonesA(1987)TheartofwarintheWesternworld.OxfordUniversityPress,OxfordKeeganJ(1978)Thefaceofbattle.PenguinBooks,LondonKeeganJ(1987)Themaskofcommand.PenguinBooks,LondonKershawR(2009)ItneversnowsinSeptember:theGermanviewofmarketgardenandthebattleofArnhem.IanAllenPublishing,Hersham,SurreyLachouqueH,BrownA(1997)Theanatomyofglory:Napoleonandhisguard.GreenhillBooks,LyonsM,JacksonD(1997)Saladin:thepoliticsofholywar.CambridgeUniversityPress,MelzerN(2010)Keepingthebalancebetweenmilitarynecessityandhumanity:aresponsetofourcritiquesoftheICRCÕsinterpretiveguidanceonthenotionofdirectparticipationinhostilities.NYUJIntÕlL&Pol42:831SchmittM(2010)Deconstructingdirectparticipationinhostilities:theconstitutiveelements.NYUJIntÕlL&Pol42:697VanHoofG(1983)Rethinkingthesourcesofinternationallaw.KluwerLawandTaxationPublishers,DeventerWalzerM(1977)Justandunjustwars:amoralargumentwithhistoricalillustrations.PenguinBooks,LondonWatkinK(2010)Opportunitylost:organizedarmedgroupsandtheICRCdirectparticipationinhostilitiesinterpretiveguidance.NYUJIntÕlL&Pol42:641WeiderHistoryGroup(2012)RaidonSt.Nazaire:OperationChariotduringWorldWarII.www.historynet.com/raid-on-st-nazaire-operation-chariot-during-world-war-ii.htm.Accessed21Nov20122Chivalry:APrincipleoftheLawofArmedConßict?51