Regulating Conventional Weapons in the Future — Humanitarian Law or Arms Control?

Abstract

Weapon regulations are difficult to achieve, but when they exist they seem to be respected in the practice of States. The prohibitions against the use of expanding bullets and biological weapons have always been effective. So has the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons, until the fourth year of the Iran-Iraq conflict. The customary rules on recording of emplaced land-mines for postwar publication functioned during the Falklands conflict. All in all, international humanitarian law in this field has demonstrated a potential that should be used in the future. The article analyzes the historical evolution of the concept of 'superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering' and suggests some areas where new restrictions or prohibitions should be striven for The article throughout indicates the existence of a fruitful relationship between international humanitarian law and disarmament. The author feels that this relationship should be explored more vigorously in the future.