Protecting Civilians in Conflict: US Warfare and the Nexus between the Ethics and Laws of War
Dr Sebastian Kaempf – University of Queensland

The paper examines how and why, despite the contemporary trend towards strengthening the principle of non-combatant immunity, enemy civilians are still being killed in American military campaigns. 'Collateral damage' has sparked controversies not only over what constitutes legitimate targeting practices (in particular with regard to dual-use facilities) but also as to whether higher levels of civilian protection could be achieved if forces were exposed to greater risks. Locating these debates in the existing literature, the paper argues that neither the laws of war/international humanitarian law nor conventional interpretations of the doctrine of double effect provide fully satisfactory answers to these issues as both are too permissive in relation to the killing of civilians. Instead of employing the doctrine of double effect, the paper draws on moral guidelines - such as those underpinning Michael Walzer's idea of 'due care' - which have the potential to go much further in providing protection for the innocent in war. Using the US wars in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq as illustrations, the paper investigates the tension between the legal and moral protection afforded to civilians in contemporary war.