Just as the United States and the Allied Forces should not go to war without knowledge of the laws of armed conflict, we should face the uncertain and dangerous situation in the Western Pacific without a firm grasp of the legal principles that guide naval warfare. not. However, the challenge is complicated by the diverse views held by different navies around the world. A new manual created by an international team of experts reveals the rules and shortcomings of this important but poorly understood area of ​​law. The U.S. military should hurry to digest and incorporate everything from troop training to multinational exercises.

Powerful and influential maritime powers make a real difference in how they interpret and apply naval tactics. For example, countries do not reasonably agree on the extent to which it is permissible to target enemy combat or continuation-of-war activities, such as oil tankers. Similarly, allies may not agree to apply some elements of the law of naval warfare, such as naval blockades, to “non-international armed conflicts” such as civil wars. Also, while many NATO countries are parties to the Hague Convention and Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention, the United States has not joined all of these agreements and accepts all of their provisions as binding common law. It does not mean that

These issues will be major problems in any naval battle in East Asia, and even in routine operations to a lesser degree. The recent transit of the USS Chun-Hung and Canada’s HMCS Montreal through the Taiwan Strait highlights the allies’ operations in a potentially dangerous area. These two allies share strategic interests and values, but have different views on some aspects of the law of the sea and the law of naval warfare. To effectively integrate operations, we need to understand each other’s approaches.

Indeed, many countries have published official publications explaining the principles of naval law. The United States Navy has the Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Warfare (2022) and his 1955 Naval Warfare Publication 10-2, the most authoritative restatement of the law of naval warfare. However, these publications, while useful on their own, contain only the US perspective. During combined operations, combatants need to understand and be cognizant of how allies and partners apply the law in maritime conflicts.

Until recently, there was no single source to guide joint operations, nor an authoritative guide to naval warfare at sea that could inform commanders and their staff in such situations. In 1994, a group of scholars published the Sanremo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea. However, the San Remo Manual does not contain national practices and practices, such as the introduction of peacetime coastal state powers over the conservation of marine resources and the protection of the marine environment into the laws of armed conflict and the granting of special protections to vessels engaged in maritime activities. contains a number of progressive statements that do not reflect international law. protect the environment. Nor, as a product of the 1990s, do we anticipate unmanned autonomous warships, nor the significant role these ships already play in today’s naval architecture, nor the integrated role they play in Force Design 2045.

An international team of experts from Australia, Germany, India, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States has produced the Newport Manual to fill this gap. This manual is his first effort since 1955 to re-define the laws of naval warfare purely as a law. Rex Rata Exercise, that is, the law as it stands (Rex Ferenda). This manual is intended to provide an authoritative guide to the rules and principles of naval warfare understood and applied by various maritime powers, and a practical handbook for commanders and sailors, lawyers and officials, educators and students. was intended.

I also tried to explain the state’s legal approach in new areas such as unmanned systems. The Newport Manual recognizes national practice in this regard that flag states are entitled to sovereign immunity, enjoy navigation rights, and commission unmanned warships that have the right to belligerent under the laws of naval warfare, including offensive operations. I admit that I can.

Unlike the body of armed conflict law expertise amassed during recent wars, which consisted primarily of ground operations, the United States and its allies and partners have limited recent experience in the law of naval warfare. At a time of heightened tension in the Western Pacific, U.S. forces and their international allies and partners are focused on maximizing exercises and training to improve interoperability. These should include a focus on naval warfare and should take advantage of the new Newport Manual. To enable allies and partners to understand how their respective approaches to the nuances of naval law promote interoperability, enhance peacetime deterrence, and facilitate synchronization of combined operations during armed conflict. .

James Kraska is the Charles H. Stockton Professor of International Maritime Law at the United States Naval War College. He is co-author of The Newport Manual.