The deployment of white phosphorus munitions, as recently documented over al-Bustan, a village in Lebanon near the Israeli border, underscores the urgent need to address the humanitarian impact of incendiary weapons within modern warfare. These incidents, including other documented uses in the Gaza Strip, Ukraine, and Syria, highlight a critical area of concern for international law and human rights.
Humanitarian Impact and Legal Challenges
White phosphorus, known for its ability to cause deep, penetrating burns and severe respiratory problems, continues to be used under a veil of tactical utility, ostensibly for creating smoke screens and marking targets. However, its devastating effects on civilians and their environments have reignited debates on the adequacy of existing laws governing the use of such weapons.
The legality of deploying these munitions is governed by Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW), which distinguishes between weapons designed expressly for incendiary purposes and those like white phosphorus used for other primary purposes. This distinction has led to significant loopholes, allowing the continued use of white phosphorus in conflict zones, affecting densely populated civilian areas disproportionately.
Dr. Iain Overton, Executive Director of Action on Armed Violence, notes threat to civilians: “The use of white phosphorus in populated areas not only challenges the moral fabric of international warfare regulations but also highlights a glaring oversight in our current legal frameworks. We are witnessing a failure to evolve these regulations in line with contemporary military practices and humanitarian needs.”
Documented Use and International Response
In Lebanon, the repeated use of white phosphorus has been thoroughly documented, revealing patterns of use that risk widespread civilian casualties. Similar patterns have been observed in Gaza, where the munitions have caused not only immediate physical injuries but also long-term psychological and environmental harm. Such uses starkly contravene the principles of distinction and proportionality, foundational to international humanitarian law.
Despite this, the response from the international community has been constrained by the structural limitations of the CCW, where substantive progress on amending the regulations governing incendiary weapons has been slow.
Advocacy for Legal Reform
The increasing recognition of the disproportionate effects of white phosphorus has led to calls for urgent international action. Human Rights Watch and other advocacy groups have been at the forefront, pushing for the reevaluation of Protocol III to better address the realities of modern warfare. These organisations, with AOAV, argue for a redefinition of incendiary weapons within the protocol to include all devices that can cause fire and burn injuries, regardless of their primary design.
During recent meetings of the High Contracting Parties to the CCW, numerous states have expressed significant concerns about the humanitarian impact of these weapons. There is a growing push for dedicated discussions to close existing loopholes and to strengthen the protections against the use of incendiary weapons in civilian areas.
Recommendations for Strengthening International Law
To mitigate the human cost of incendiary weapons and align international law with current ethical standards, several steps are recommended:
- Broadening the Definition: Amend CCW Protocol III to include a broader definition of incendiary weapons that encompasses all munitions causing incendiary effects, including white phosphorus.
- Enhancing Protections: Strengthen the treaty to provide equal protections against both air-dropped and ground-launched incendiary devices, ensuring comprehensive safeguards for civilians.
- Independent Monitoring: Establish independent monitoring bodies to oversee the implementation of these regulations and to ensure compliance by all signatory states.
- Promoting International Standards: Encourage states to adopt national regulations that align with the strengthened international standards, promoting greater accountability and transparency in military operations.
The continued use of white phosphorus in conflict zones presents an ongoing challenge to the international community’s commitment to upholding human rights in warfare.
As Dr. Overton says, “This is not just about legal reform; it’s about aligning our moral compass with the realities of contemporary warfare. The international community must not only revise the laws but also enforce them stringently to protect civilian lives against the indiscriminate horrors of incendiary weapons.”
As debates continue and the body of evidence grows, the call for action becomes increasingly urgent. The international community must respond decisively to ensure that the horrors witnessed in Lebanon, Gaza, and beyond do not become normalised facets of modern conflicts.