5cjxburmr

5.7.7.1 Capture or Neutralization. The definition of military objectiveincorporates considerations beyond whether an object’s destruction is justified. It alsoincorporates considerations of whether the object’s capture and neutralization would offer amilitary advantage.Capture refers to the possibility of seizure (rather than destruction), which would confer amilitary advantage. For example, the seizure of a city may be a military objective because of itsstrategic location. 163Neutralization refers to a military action that denies an object to the enemy withoutcapturing or destroying it. For example, a specific area of land may be neutralized by plantinglandmines on or around it, and thus denying it to the enemy. 1645.7.7.2 In the Circumstances Ruling at the Time. The attack of the object must,“in the circumstances ruling at the time,” offer a definite military advantage for the object to beconsidered a military objective.Nonetheless, the purpose (i.e., future use) of the object can be considered in whether anobject provides an effective contribution to the adversary’s military action. 165 In addition, thedefinite military advantage offered by the attack need not be immediate, but may be assessed inthe full context of the war strategy. 1665.7.7.3 Definite Military Advantage. “Definite” means a concrete and perceptiblemilitary advantage, rather than one that is merely hypothetical or speculative. 167The advantage need not be immediate. 168 For example, the military advantage in theattack of an individual bridge may not be seen immediately (particularly if, at the time of theattack, there is no military traffic in the area), but can be established by the overall effort toisolate enemy military forces on the battlefield through the destruction of bridges.163 Refer to § 5.7.8.4 (Examples of Military Objectives – Places of Military Significance).164 Refer to § 5.7.8.4 (Examples of Military Objectives – Places of Military Significance).165 Refer to § 5.7.6.1 (Nature, Location, Purpose, or Use).166 Refer to § 5.7.7.3 (Definite Military Advantage).167 For example, W. Hays Parks, Asymmetries and the Identification of Legitimate Military Objectives, inINTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW FACING NEW CHALLENGES footnotes 88 and 170 and accompanying text(2007) (giving an example of a case in which objects did not meet this standard, “the 25 February 1991recommendation by the U.S. Air Force component of US Central Command for an air attack on a Baghdad statue ofSaddam Hussayn and another statue, consisting of matching sets of arms with crossed swords (modeled on the armsof Saddam Hussayn), called the Victory Arch or Crossed Swords Monument,” because the military assessment wasthat such targets were worthless and any value from attacking them was too speculative).168 See J. Fred Buzhardt, DoD General Counsel, Letter to Senator Edward Kennedy, Sept. 22, 1972, reprinted in 67AJIL 122, 124 (1973) (“Turning to the deficiencies in the Resolutions of the Institut de Droit International, and withthe foregoing in view, it cannot be said that Paragraph 2, which refers to legal restraints that there must be an‘immediate’ military advantage, reflects the law of armed conflict that has been adopted in the practices of States.”).211