5cjxburmr

• Public movable property and certain types of private movable property may customarilybe captured as war booty;• Enemy private movable property that is not susceptible of direct military use may beappropriated only to the extent that such taking is permissible in occupied areas;• Pillage is prohibited; and• Feasible precautions should be taken to mitigate the burden on civilians, but there is noobligation to compensate the owners of enemy property that is lawfully damaged.During occupation, other rules relating to the treatment of enemy property apply. 4115.17.1 Definition of Enemy Property. All property located in enemy territory is regardedas enemy property regardless of its ownership. 4125.17.2 Enemy Property – Military Necessity Standard. Enemy property may not beseized or destroyed unless imperatively demanded by the necessities of war. 413 In particular,devastation or destruction may not be pursued as an end in itself. 414 The measure of permissibleseizure or destruction of enemy property is found in the strict necessities of war. 415 There mustbe some reasonable connection between the seizure or destruction of the enemy property and theovercoming of enemy forces. 416Extensive destruction and appropriation of property protected by the GC, not justified bymilitary necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly, constitutes a grave breach of theGC. 4175.17.2.1 Using the Military Objective Definition to Assess Whether the Seizure orDestruction of Enemy Property Is Justified by Military Necessity. The definition of military411 Refer to § 11.18 (Enemy Property During Occupation).412 See, e.g., Aris Gloves, Inc. v. United States, 420 F.2d 1386, 1391 (Ct. Cl. 1970) (collecting cases and describing“the general rule that all property located in enemy territory, regardless of its ownership, is in time of war regardedas enemy property subject to the laws of war”).413 HAGUE IV REG. art. 23(g) (“[I]t is especially forbidden: … (g.) To destroy or seize the enemy’s property, unlesssuch destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;”). For general discussion ofmilitary necessity, refer to § 2.2 (Military Necessity).414 1956 FM 27-10 (Change No. 1 1976) 56 (“Devastation as an end in itself or as a separate measure of war is notsanctioned by the law of war.”); United States v. List, et al. (The Hostage Case), XI TRIALS OF WAR CRIMINALSBEFORE THE NMT 1253 (“Destruction as an end in itself is a violation of international law.”). Refer to § 2.3.1(Humanity as a Prohibition).415 1956 FM 27-10 (Change No. 1 1976) 56 (“The measure of permissible devastation is found in the strictnecessities of war.”).416 United States v. List, et al. (The Hostage Case), XI TRIALS OF WAR CRIMINALS BEFORE THE NMT 1253-54(“There must be some reasonable connection between the destruction of property and the overcoming of the enemyforces.”).417 Refer to § 18.9.3.1 (Acts Constituting Grave Breaches).262