5cjxburmr

prohibited only if their use is clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overallmilitary advantage anticipated.” 2196.10.4 Environmental Modification Techniques for Peaceful Purposes. The ENMODConvention does not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peacefulpurposes. 2206.11 WEAPONS INJURING BY FRAGMENTS NOT DETECTABLE BY X-RAYSIt is prohibited to use any weapon the primary effect of which is to injure by fragmentsthat in the human body escape detection by X-rays. 2216.11.1 Primary Effect. The prohibition requires that the fragments that are intended tocause injury be made of materials that are detectable in the human body by X-rays.Portions of many munitions, such as the casing, detonator, or timing mechanism, may bemade of nonmetallic parts or other substances that are not detectable by X-rays in order to reduceweight, manufacturing costs, etc. These munitions are not prohibited because their primaryeffect is not to injure by fragments that in the human body escape detection by X-rays. 2226.11.2 Fragments That Injure by Penetrating the Human Body. The prohibition appliesonly to weapons that are intended to injure by penetrating the human body. Thus, for example, ainternational law. In their instruments of ratification of the 1980 CCW, both France and the United States assertedthat the preambular paragraph in the CCW treaty, which refers to the substance of Articles 35(3) and 55, appliedonly to States that have accepted those articles. The U.S. State Department Principal Deputy Legal Adviser statedduring a conference in 1987 that the United States considered Articles 35 and 55 to be overly broad and ambiguousand ‘not a part of customary law.’”).219 U.S. RESPONSE TO ICRC CIHL STUDY 528 endnote 30 (“An example illustrates why States – particularly thosenot party to AP I – are unlikely to have supported rule 45. Suppose that country A has hidden its chemical andbiological weapons arsenal in a large rainforest, and plans imminently to launch the arsenal at country B. Undersuch a rule, country B could not launch a strike against that arsenal if it expects that such a strike may causewidespread, long-term, and severe damage to the rainforest, even if it has evidence of country A’s imminent launch,and knows that such a launch itself would cause environmental devastation.”).220 ENMOD CONVENTION art. 3(1) (“The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmentalmodification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principlesand applicable rules of international law concerning such use.”).221 CCW PROTOCOL I (“It is prohibited to use any weapon the primary effect of which is to injure by fragmentswhich in the human body escape detection by X-rays.”).222 Canada, Statement on Ratification of CCW, Accepting Protocols I, II, & III, Jun. 24, 1994, 1787 UNTS 501(“With respect to Protocol I, it is the understanding of the Government of Canada that the use of plastics or similarmaterials for detonators or other weapons parts not designed to cause injury is not prohibited.”). For example, W.Hays Parks, Memorandum re: Advanced Combat Rifle; Request for Legal Review, 6 (May 21, 1990), reprinted inTHE ARMY LAWYER 18, 20 (Jul. 1990) (“[B]oth the AAI and Steyr-Mannlicher ammunition employ liquid crystalpolymers in the sabot that holds the flechette in place. It is not necessary to determine whether liquid crystalpolymers are detectable by x-ray, as the sabot in each round is employed for effects other than injury to combatants.(The wounding capability of the sabot is extremely limited, as it separates from the flechette, quickly loses its force,and falls to the ground within one hundred feet of the muzzle.) The negotiation history of the UNCCW Protocol I isclear that its prohibition would not extend to the polymer sabot in the AAI and Steyr ammunition.”).355