The Interaction Between the Obligation to Warn and Other Rules of ihl

Abstract

The obligation to give effective advance warning of an attack which may affect the civilian population is one of the precautions in attack parties to an armed conflict must take under ihl. Recent practice has shown this duty may interact with other rules of ihl. This article discusses this interaction. It focuses on warnings that spread terror, that may be used as a ruse or that lead to displacement of civilians, cases in which warnings arguably breach the principle of distinction, and cases in which warnings lead to human shields. The article concludes that in some cases the object and purpose of ihl may provide guidance in navigating the tension between the obligation to warn and another rule of ihl. It also concludes that the intention with which a warning is given may be decisive for distinguishing between a warning as required under ihl and as a violation of ihl.