5cjxburmr

On the other hand, an explosive bullet that was designed to explode in order to increasethe probability of striking an enemy combatant or to strike an enemy combatant behind coverwould not be prohibited. 71 Similarly, bullets that explode in order to neutralize enemy materialmore effectively are not prohibited, and there is no objection to using these bullets also againstenemy combatants. 72The United States is not a Party to the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration on ExplodingBullets, and its prohibition on the use of certain projectiles does not reflect customaryinternational law. 736.5.4.4 Expanding Bullets. The law of war does not prohibit the use of bulletsthat expand or flatten easily in the human body. Like other weapons, such bullets are onlyprohibited if they are calculated to cause superfluous injury. 74 The U.S. armed forces have usedexpanding bullets in various counterterrorism and hostage rescue operations, some of which havebeen conducted in the context of armed conflict.The 1899 Declaration on Expanding Bullets prohibits the use of expanding bullets inarmed conflicts in which all States that are parties to the conflict are also Party to the 1899Declaration on Expanding Bullets. 75 The United States is not a Party to the 1899 Declaration onExpanding Bullets, in part because evidence was not presented at the diplomatic conference thatexpanding bullets produced unnecessarily severe or cruel wounds. 7671 For example, C. Todd Lopez, Army wants 36 more “Punisher” weapons in 2012, ARMY NEWS SERVICE, Feb. 3,2011 (“The XM25 allows Soldiers to engage defilade targets -- those behind a barrier, protected from oncomingweapons fire. The XM25 measures the distance to the enemy’s protective barrier, and can then program the roundto detonate a user-adjustable distance past that -- allowing Soldiers to put an air-bursting round directly above theenemy’s head, inside their protected area. … The five prototype weapons entered theater in November, and werefirst used in combat Dec. 3.”).72 U.S. RESPONSE TO ICRC CIHL STUDY 524 (“States widely have employed bullets that may detonate on impactwith materiel for both anti-materiel and anti-personnel purposes. Such ammunition was in common use by all Statesthat participated in World War II, and in conflicts thereafter including in widespread aircraft strafing of enemyforces, a practice common to every conflict since World War I in which aircraft were employed.”). Seealso Commission of Jurists to Consider and Report Upon the Revision of the Rules of Warfare, General Report,Feb. 19, 1923, reprinted in 32 AJIL SUPPLEMENT: OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 1, 20-21 (1938) (“In the form in which theproposal was first brought forward its provisions were limited to a stipulation that the use of tracer bullets againstaircraft generally was not prohibited. Various criticisms were, however, made about the proposed text, chieflyfounded on the impracticability for an airman while in flight to change the ammunition which he is using in themachine-gun in his aircraft. He cannot employ different bullets in accordance with the target at which he is aiming,one sort of ammunition for other aircraft and another sort for land forces by whom he may be attacked. TheCommission, therefore, came to the conclusion that the most satisfactory solution of the problem would be to statespecifically that the use of tracer, incendiary or explosive projectiles by or against aircraft is not prohibited.”).73 Refer to § 19.6 (1868 St. Petersburg Declaration).74 Refer to § 6.6 (Weapons Calculated to Cause Superfluous Injury).75 Refer to § 19.7.1 (1899 Declaration on Expanding Bullets).76 William Crozier, Captain of Ordnance, U.S. Army, Report of Captain Crozier to the American Delegation to theFirst Hague Conference, Regarding the Work of the First Committee of the Conference and its Subcommittee,reprinted in INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AMERICAN DELEGATES TO THE HAGUE PEACE CONFERENCES AND THEIROFFICIAL REPORTS 34 (1916) (noting the objection of the U.S. representative that the 1899 Declaration “condemned323