June 2012
Marquette Law Review;Summer2012, Vol. 95 Issue 4, p1417
Academic Journal
Salim Hamdan's conviction in a military commission for material support of Al Qaeda separates utilitarians, who generally defer to state power, from protective theorists, who seek to shield civilians by curbing official discretion. Utilitarians view military commissions as efficient means for trying suspected terrorists. Protective theorists criticize the amorphous nature of material support charges. The clash between utilitarians and protective theorists colors other issues, including "enhanced" interrogation and limits on targeting. Protective theorists merit praise for their scrutiny of interrogation. In contrast, utilitarians have trivialized interrogation abuses. However, protective theorists' scrutiny of states is burdened by hindsight bias. Failing to recognize the challenges faced by states, protective theorists have ignored the risk to civilians posed by changes such as the International Committee of the Red Cross' Guidance on Direct Participation in Hostilities that create a "revolving door" shielding bomb makers for terrorist groups. To move beyond the utilitarian-protective debate, this piece advances a structural approach informed by two values: a linear time horizon and holistic signaling. Drawing on cognitive studies of humans' flawed temporal judgment and the Framers' work on institutional design, a linear time horizon curbs both myopia that infects officials and hindsight bias that plagues the protective model. Holistic signaling requires the United States to support the law of armed conflict, even (or especially) when adversaries such as Al Qaeda reject that framework. Applying the structural test, a state can use a sliding scale of imminence and necessity to justify targeting Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists in states unwilling or unable to apprehend them. However, the material support charges against Hamdan signal a troubling turn to victors' justice.


Related Articles

  • AFGHANISTAN: HOW WE GOT THERE. Paul, Lawrence M. // New York Times Upfront;2/8/2010, Vol. 142 Issue 9, p14 

    The article presents a discussion of the relationship of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 to the recent involvement of the U.S. with the country. The 10-year war that followed the Soviet invasion in 1979 led to several events including the collapse of the Soviet Union, the emergence of...

  • Drone war against Pakistan: An analytical study. Mazhar, Muhammad Saleem; Goraya, Naheed S. // Journal of Political Studies;Winter2011, Vol. 18 Issue 2, p187 

    Drones are the 21st century state of art technology. Today these Unnamed Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have become the most effectual weaponry to be used by the sole super power of the world against Al Qaeda and the militants. Pakistan as a Non-NATO Ally in the war against terrorism has been victimized...

  • A Drumbeat of Fear. Rothschild, Matthew // Progressive;Apr2003, Vol. 67 Issue 4, p4 

    Focuses on the U.S. war against Iraq. Criticisms on U.S. President George W. Bush for deciding to go to war against Iraq; Violation of the Constitution by Bush; Role of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the decision of Bush.

  • Reifying September 11: why the Left hasn't lost the War on Terror. Holloway, David // European Journal of American Culture;2002, Vol. 21 Issue 2, p86 

    Studies the reifying of the September 11, 2001 and the war on terror of the U.S. government. Implications of the authoritarianism for the hegemony of New Right in the country; Assessment of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni to the war on terror; Information on the testing of the...

  • INTERNATIONAL LAW IN CRISIS: CHALLENGES POSED BY THE NEW TERRORISM AND THE CHANGING NATURE OF WAR. Murphy, John F. // Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law;2011, Vol. 44 Issue 1/2, p59 

    The theme of this conference is "International Law in Crisis." Two prime examples of the challenges facing international law and international institutions are the so-called "new terrorism" and the changing nature of war. In contrast to the "old terrorism" the new terrorism, which is religiously...

  • Can the Law of Armed Conflict Survive 9/11? Garraway, Charles // Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge University;Dec2011, Vol. 14, p383 

    For those of my generation, the question always used to be, “Can you remember where you were when you heard of Kennedy's assassination?” I can, but that question has now been replaced by “Can you remember where you were when you heard about the Twin Towers?” Again I can....

  • Legacy of 9/11: Continuing the Humanization of Humanitarian Law. Padmanabhan, Vijay M. // Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge University;Dec2011, Vol. 14, p419 

    In 2000 Theodor Meron published his landmark essay entitled The Humanization of Humanitarian Law. Meron demonstrated that there is a gradual convergence in protections between human rights law and international humanitarian law (IHL) developing, which is fueled by a common commitment to human...

  • State Sovereignty After 9/11: Disorganised Hypocrisy. Acharya, Amitav // Political Studies;Jun2007, Vol. 55 Issue 2, p274 

    This article examines the implications of the 9/11 attacks and the US-led ‘global war on terror’ for debates about state sovereignty. To support its attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, the Bush administration put forth a ‘selective sovereignty’ thesis that would legitimise...

  • The Persistence of Politics. Kuttner, Robert // American Prospect;10/22/2001, Vol. 12 Issue 18, p2 

    Focuses on the persistence of politics during war. Implications of the September 11, 2001 U.S. terrorist attacks; War of liberal democracy against totalitarianism; National unity required.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics