ABSTRACT
International law recognizes a distinction between lawful and unlawful belligerents: Only the former are afforded the protections of the Hague and Geneva conventions. Unlawful belligerents, according to the Hague conventions, are to be dealt with according to the laws and customs of the capturing country-which in some lands has traditionally meant summary execution without trial, though more recent additions to the Geneva conventions urge humane treatment and trials in all cases. Belligerents, lawful or unlawful, are not the only legitimate objects of attack in war. The Hague conventions require a warning, declaration, or ultimatum before signatories go to war, and no subsequent development in international law has made compliance with the provision illegal. Military necessity has often been used to justify actions and policies that seemed morally or legally questionable. The principle of proportionality is said to require that the harm done by military action be in proportion to the military gain.
