5cjxburmr

law of war has developed. 29 The discretion afforded States in applying law of war rules to noninternationalarmed conflicts results, in part, because treaty provisions applicable to internationalarmed conflict have been presumed not to apply to non-international armed conflict unlessexplicitly made applicable. For example, in the 1949 Geneva Conventions, only CommonArticle 3 applies to non-international armed conflict. 30 The discretion afforded States in thisregard may also be understood to result from the wide range of circumstances that constitutenon-international armed conflict. The United States has objected to efforts to make theapplicability of the rules of international armed conflict turn on subjective and politicized criteriathat would eliminate the distinction between international and non-international conflicts. 31In the sections that follow, which reflect the practice of the U.S. armed forces in applyingthe law of war to non-international armed conflict, the rules articulated may exceed therequirements of applicable customary international law and treaty law.17.2.1 Treaties That Apply to NIAC. Relatively few treaties have provisions thatexpressly apply to non-international armed conflicts. Some treaties, however, may applyimplicitly to non-international armed conflict.17.2.1.1 Treaties That Have Provisions That Explicitly Apply to NIAC. Certaintreaties to which the United States is a Party have provisions that explicitly apply to noninternationalarmed conflict. These treaties include:• the 1949 Geneva Conventions (i.e., Common Article 3); 32• the 1954 Hague Cultural Property Convention; 33• the CCW Amended Mines Protocol; 3429 See, e.g., FRANCIS LIEBER, GUERRILLA PARTIES CONSIDERED WITH REFERENCE TO THE LAWS AND USAGES OFWAR 21 (1862) (“The application of the laws and usages of war to wars of insurrection or rebellion is alwaysundefined, and depends on relaxations of municipal law, suggested by humanity or necessitated by the numbersengaged in the insurrection. The law of war, as acknowledged between independent belligerents, is, at times, notallowed to interfere with the municipal law of rebellion, or is allowed to do so only very partially, as was the case inGreat Britain during the Stuart rebellion, in the middle of last century; at other times, again, measures are adopted inrebellions, by the victorious party or the legitimate government, more lenient even than the international law ofwar.”).30 GC COMMENTARY 34 (“To borrow the phrase of one of the delegates, Article 3 is like a ‘Convention inminiature’. It applies to non-international conflicts only, and will be the only Article applicable to them until suchtime as a special agreement between the Parties has brought into force between them all or part of the otherprovisions of the Convention.”).31 Refer to § 3.3.4 (AP I Provision on National Liberation Movements).32 GPW art. 3 (“In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of theHigh Contracting Parties … .”); GWS (same); GWS Sea (same); GC (same).33 1954 HAGUE CULTURAL PROPERTY CONVENTION art. 19(1) (“In the event of an armed conflict not of aninternational character occurring within the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to theconflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the provisions of the present Convention which relate to respect forcultural property.”).1016