The US Department of Defense Law of War Manual: An Update

They're updating this.

I have a report in the 2009 (they're a bit behind...just go with it) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law on efforts to produce a new service-wide US Department of Defence Law of War Manual. This would replace FM 27-10 and (should it ever see the light of day...just go with it) will be an incredibly important statement of US practice on the laws of war.

I consulted on and observed this project from August-December 2009 and I keep in contact with some of the editors. The description of the Manual (and estimate of delivery) are now outdated, but there is a good description of the process and methodology behind it. I can't go into any more details than that (there is a crazy on-going process) but it is "an update" for those who are interested. Here's the abstract:

One of the major legal instruments the US Department of Defense (DoD) will be relying on in terms of planning and carrying out its activities in the near future is a new law of war military manual which is expected to be published sometime in 2011. While on the surface such a document may not seem of critical interest to those interested in security/strategic studies or to humanitarian activists seeking to ban rather than regulate violence, there are important reasons to place a certain amount of emphasis on this DoD product and to expect that it will have a significant impact, especially on issues that are presently widely debated within the humanitarian legal community.

Abdullah Khadr, Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism: Or what I was really trying to say

I was quoted in a story in the Globe and Mail on Abdullah Khadr (older brother of Omar who is in Guantanamo Bay) and the government's attempts to extradite him to the US to face terrorism charges. They definitely got the quotes alright but I think the summary of my argument was a bit mangled; I'm not sure this was the first time that due process has been considered in a terrorism trial. I was suggesting that Canadian courts have been very sympathetic to the concerns/needs of the government/security services (ie: on rules of evidence during the Toronto 18 trial, etc) and that this is a marked change from that.


Anyway, I have expanded on my views in a Duck of Minerva Post. Just don't read the comments on the Globe and Mail site. *shudder* People is crazy.

Putting the "Me" in Media: People sometimes think I'm worth quoting

Not so-much Canada-stuff, but I have been quoted in the media recently.

First was with the very cool Chris Albon (who blogs here and tweets here) who had a piece on the Atlantic Wire blog on the disturbing trend of targeting healthcare workers in the Arab Spring. (My take: it's bad and crazy illegal to target healthcare workers)

Second, the Christian Science Monitor interviewed me (from a plane that was about to take off to Canada) on Obama's visit to London. I'm on the second page.

Please feel free to bask in my wisdom, oh internets!