The changing nature of armed conflict, where most of the victims are civilians accompanied by the devastation of civilian objects, requires rethinking the elements of operational art, which are adversary-centric at the expense of noncombatants who are ubiquitous in present-day battlefields. Respect for, and compliance with, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is a panacea to violations against non-combatants in contemporary warfare. The principle of distinction is the sine qua non of protection of civilians. The rules of targeting lie at the heart of IHL, while the principle of distinction is the keystone in targeting guided by rules of engagement as the practical application of the legal constraints to combat. As such, the cognitive skills of the military in IHL are vital to preventing civilian death, mitigating incidental injury, and diminishing collateral damage in hostilities. In addressing the question of how to mitigate civilian harm in contemporary hostilities, through discourse analysis and desktop survey, this discussion notes that the omission to master IHL at the operational and strategic levels in professional military education, as evidenced by doctrinal gaps in the application of operational art and military decision-making processes, renders the integration of humanitarian norms utopian. The oversight also reinforces the reticence to mitigate civilian harm in modern-day conflicts. Inspired by the prospect theory in military decision-making process, the paper posits that effective civilian protection requires “smart operations” involving a framework for enhanced risk analysis and mitigation of civilian harm in military decision-making processes. In executing “smart operations,” belligerents demonstrate effective integration of IHL into strategy, operations, and tactics thereby enhancing prospects of return to peace.
Smart Operations: Rethinking Operational Art To Effectively Protect Civilians
