An analysis of the choice and use of weapons by Russia and Georgia in the 2008 South Ossetia conflict
In this minor dissertation, the use and choice of weapons employed during the armed conflict between Georgia and Russia in 2008 over South Ossetia will be analysed. Due to the fact that cluster munitions were used by both parties, and that they are a controversial weapon with regard the principles regulating the use and choice of weapons, section I of this dissertation will focus on them and their regulation in international law. Section II will focus on the facts concerning the 2008 conflict over and South Ossetia. Section III will look at the international humanitarian laws applicable and relevant to this dissertation. In sections IV, V, and VI arguments will be raised in order to attribute violations of international humanitarian law to Georgia, while countering foreseeable arguments which could be invoked against Russia. This dissertation will therefore only analyse the provisions when they are pertinent to that aim. The desired outcome of proceeding in such a manner is that since both the viewpoints of the claimant and the defendant will be analysed, an extended and well-rounded view on the law, its interpretation, controversies, opinions of established scholars and jurisprudence, will be given. The relevant principles relating to the use and choice of weapons which will be analysed are: the principle of discrimination (section IV), the principle of proportionality (section V), as well as the prohibition to cause superfluous harm (section VI). Certain specific issues such as human shields will also be looked at in the analysis of a particular attack. In the analysis of this conflict, both well-established arguments, as well as controversial or disputed ones, will be presented in order to support either side. This analysis will argue that Georgia violated international humanitarian law, while defending Russia's conduct, however, the arguments presented will remain coherent and not contradict each other. This paper's scope will be limited to analysing attacks which are sufficiently documented and imply a problem of use and choice of weapons; as opposed to the ones which solely purport an issue of military objective and were hit by a precise missile. Indeed, this dissertation focuses more on controversial weapons and whether they violate international humanitarian law solely by their inherent nature, that is, the mere choice of using them would be in violation of the law; or by their specific use in the attack. The four attacks analysed will allow an in depth analysis of the different aspects that the use and choice of weapons can entail; the 2 dissertation will therefore be limited to them and any further attack which do not bring to light any new arguments will not be investigated. The attacks which will be examined in the context of the conflict over South Ossetia occurred both in South Ossetia as well as non-disputed Georgian territory. These are: the one launched by Georgia using BM-21 Grads multiple rocket launchers on Tskhinvali and surrounding villages lasting from the night of the 7th of August until some point during the day of the 8th of August;1 the 9th of August attack where Georgia employed Mk-4 cluster munition rockets containing M85 submunitions over Gori district villages, the Roki tunnel and according to a witness, Dzara Road2; Russia's attack on Gori city on the 12th of August using an Iskander-M SS-26 cluster munition missile;3 as well as the firing of a few missiles on a school in Gori city by the Russian air force on the 9th of August.4 The entirety of the facts pertaining to the conflict are drawn from the report on the conflict carried out by Human Rights Watch entitled 'Up in Flames'.5 The analysis of the relevant provisions will proceed as follows: the rules will be analysed one by one, following the general introduction to the rule, general statements regarding its interpretation and application, the law will then be applied to the different attacks, given that enough facts are provided and that it pertains to the aim of the dissertation. If there are specific interpretations or applications of the law which are only relevant to one attack, it will be mentioned directly under said attack.
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations