Is All Mental Harm Equal? The Importance of Discussing Civilian War Trauma from a Socio-Economic Legal Framework's Perspective

Solon Solomon, Ya'akov Bayer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In recent years, international law scholars have discussed how civilian mental harm in warfare should also form part of the jus in bello proportionality principle and be balanced to the anticipated military advantage. Yet, these scholars have not proceeded one step further to examine whether socio-economic parameters shaping the individual's personality, such as education, family ties or the level of income, should be also taken into account as varying variables in this balancing task. This is particularly important given that the particular parameters are tied to the socio-economics rights discourse and the relevant minimal living standards notion developed there. Based on a study we conducted, the article explores whether civilian mental harm should be affected by socio-economic parameters and what this means for the wider role socio-economic rights can play in armed conflicts as well as for the reading of jus in bello along Marxist terms.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)528-547
Number of pages20
JournalNordic Journal of International Law
Volume92
Issue number4
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 1 Jan 2023

Keywords

  • civilian mental harm
  • jus in bello
  • Marxist interpretation
  • socio-economic rights

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Political Science and International Relations
  • Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is All Mental Harm Equal? The Importance of Discussing Civilian War Trauma from a Socio-Economic Legal Framework's Perspective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this