Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:20:33.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neutral mariners and humanitarian law: a precedent for protecting neutrals in armed conflict

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2010

Michael Harris Hoffman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Stormy petrels are small, dark-hued seagoing birds. In violent weather they fly between the waves for protection. According to the lore of the sea, they are heralds of danger.

For centuries, neutral mariners navigating the same waters have tried to avoid the violence that engulfed seafaring warriors. In our mobile world, their experience is a cautionary tale and represents a legal precedent for all international travellers. In recent times airline passengers, expatriate workers and many others have been endangered by conflicts not their own. When that happens, their lives depend on the same principles that have been forged to protect neutrals at sea. Neutral mariners have been the stormy petrels of international law.

Type
War at Sea
Information
International Review of the Red Cross (1961 - 1997) , Volume 32 , Issue 288 , June 1992 , pp. 274 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of the American Red Cross.

References

1 Goethe, Friedrich, in: Grzimek, Bernhard, ed., Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, pp. 155–156.Google Scholar

2 Jessup, Philip, and Deak, Francis, Neutrality: Its History, Economics and Law, Columbia University Press, New York, 1935, p. 165.Google Scholar

3 Ibid.

4 Pictet, Jean, ed. Commentary on the Second Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, ICRC, Geneva, 1960, p. 98.Google Scholar

5 Opinions of Attorneys General, House of Representatives Ex., Doc. No. 55, 31st Congress 2d Session, Washington, 1851, pp. 33–35.Google Scholar

6 Lowrie, Walter and Clarke, Matthew, eds, American State Papers, Gales & Seaton, 1832, Vol. 2 (Foreign Relations), pp. 61–63.Google Scholar

7 Bevans, Charles, ed., Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America 1776–1949, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1971, Vol. 7, p. 809.Google Scholar

8 Feldbaek, Ole, “The Anglo-Danish Convoy Conflict of 1800” in Scandinavian Journal of History, 2, 1977, pp. 170–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Mahan, A.T. The Influence of Sea Power Upon the French Revolution and Empire 1793–1812, Vol. II, Reprinted by Scholarly Press, Michigan, pp. 53–55.Google Scholar

10 See case of La Purissima Conception (1803)Google Scholar reprinted in The English Reports, W. Green & Son, Ltd., 1923, Vol. 165 pp. 687–690.Google Scholar

11 Ibid, see case of De Fire Darner (1805), pp. 804–805.Google Scholar

12 See case of The Lively (U.S. Circuit Court for District of Massachusetts 1812) reprinted in The Federal Cases, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, 1895, Vol. 15, pp. 631, 636.Google Scholar

13 Moore, John Bassett, A Digest of International Law, Government Printing Office, Washington, 1906, Vol. 2, pp. 999–1001.Google Scholar

14 See text in Schindler, Dietrich and Toman, Jiri, eds, The Laws of Armed Conflicts, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1988, p. 788 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, “Declaration Respecting Maritime Law, (1856)”.Google Scholar

15 Message of the President of the United States to the Two Houses of Congress, Government Printing Office Washington, Ex. Doc. No. 1, 37th Congress, 3d Session, 1862, Vol. 1, p. 243.Google Scholar

16 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion, Government Printing Office, Washington, 1897, Series I, Vol. 6, p. 498.Google Scholar

17 Bernath, Stuart, Squall Across the Atlantic: American Civil War Prize Cases and Diplomacy, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1970, pp. 142–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Op. cit., note 4, p. 98.Google Scholar

19 Scott, James Brown, ed., Resolutions of the Institute of International Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 1916, pp. 46, 56.Google Scholar

20 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States 1898, Kraus Reprint Corporation, New York, 1968, pp. 777–778.Google Scholar

21 Ibid, p. 781.

22 Takahashi, Sakuye, International Law Applied to the Russo-Japanese War, (American editor), The Banks law Publishing Co., New York, 1908, pp. 317–330.Google Scholar

23 Op. cit., note 14, p. 821 Google Scholar, Hague Convention XI of 1907, Arts. 5,6.

24 Op. cit. note 14, p. 852 Google Scholar, Declaration Concerning the Laws of Naval War, Art. 50.

25 Hackworth, Green Haywood, Digest of International Law, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1943, Vol. 7, p. 247.Google Scholar

26 Horne, Charles F., ed., Source Records of the Great War. U.S., s.: National Alumni, 1923, Vol. 3, p. 53.Google Scholar

27 Churchill, Winston S., The World Crisis, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1931, p. 749.Google Scholar

28 Op. cit., note 26, p. 56.Google Scholar

29 Op. cit., note 26, pp. 59–64.Google Scholar

30 Op. cit., note 26, vol. 4 pp. 100–101.Google Scholar

31 Mallison, Sally V., and Mallison, W. Thomas, “Naval Targeting: Lawful Objects of Attack.” International Law Studies 1991: The Law of Naval Operations. Ed. Robertson, Jr, Horace, B., Naval War College Press, Newport, vol. 64, p. 246.Google Scholar

32 Ibid, p. 247.

33 Morison, Samuel Eliot, History of United States Naval Operations in World War Two. Little, Brown and Company, Boston, 1975, Vol. 1, p. 9.Google Scholar

34 Ibid., pp. 9–10.

35 See Article 2 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, which stipulates that each Convention shall apply “to all cases of declared war or any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties…”. Nothing is said about application to situations involving neutrals.

36 Intertanko, , Iran/Iraq Conflict 1984/1988. The Tanker War — No End? 3rd Edition, International Association of Independent Tanker Owners, Norway, 1988. pp. 42–43.Google Scholar

37 Ibid., pp. 23–25.

38 The Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 9 (Rev. A), FMFM 1–10, para. 7.9.2., Reprinted in Robertson, Horace B., ed., International Law Studies 1991: The Law of Naval Operations, Vol. 64, Naval War College Press, Newport, pp. 472–473.Google Scholar

39 Op. cit., note 14, p. 945 Google Scholar. Hague Convention V of 1907, Art. 17.

40 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, Art. 98, and Geneva Convention on the High Seas, Art. 12.