Session 9 Flashcards
Q: What was the name of the cyber campaign launched by Anonymous during the 2012 Gaza conflict?
A: OpIsrael.
Q: What were the main tactics used by Anonymous in their cyber attacks against Israel in 2012?
A: Denial-of-Service attacks, website defacements, and large-scale data breaches.
Q: How many Israeli government websites did Anonymous target, and what kind of data did they leak?
A: Over 300 websites were targeted; they leaked personal data of around 35,000 Israeli citizens and supporters, including names, emails, phone numbers, and addresses.
Q: What reason did Anonymous give for their cyber attacks on Israel in 2012?
A: Retaliation against alleged Israeli human rights abuses and military actions in Gaza.
Q: How did the Israeli government respond to the cyber attacks?
A: Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz acknowledged a “second front” of cyber attacks and claimed that 44 million attacks were deflected, with minimal impact.
Q: What broader context did the cyber attacks occur within during November 2012?
A: The Gaza conflict, where Israeli military operations and Hamas rocket attacks resulted in the deaths of 95 Gazans and 3 Israelis, with many more wounded.
Q: What is cyber warfare under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)?
A: Cyber warfare refers to the use of ICT systems to conduct hostile operations during an armed conflict, including attacks on digital infrastructure.
Q: Does International Humanitarian Law apply to cyber operations?
A: Yes, there is consensus that IHL applies to cyber operations conducted during an armed conflict, as affirmed by the ICRC and the Tallinn Manual.
Q: What are the two types of armed conflict where cyber operations may trigger IHL?
A: International Armed Conflict (IAC) and Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC).
Q: What is the threshold for a cyber operation to qualify as an “armed conflict” under IHL?
A: The cyber operation must cause physical damage, injury, death, or destruction equivalent to kinetic attacks.
Q: What is the principle of distinction in the context of cyber warfare?
A: Parties must distinguish between military objectives and civilian objects; however, many cyber infrastructures are dual-use, complicating this requirement.
Q: How does the principle of proportionality apply to cyber attacks?
A: Cyber attacks must not cause excessive civilian harm in relation to the anticipated military advantage.
Q: What is the rule on precautions in cyber operations under IHL?
A: Parties must take feasible precautions to avoid or minimize incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects during cyber attacks.
Q: When can civilians lose their protection from attack in cyber warfare?
A: If they directly participate in hostilities, such as conducting cyber attacks that affect military operations.
Q: Why is attribution a legal challenge in cyber warfare?
A: Cyber attacks are often anonymous, involve proxies, or use false flags, making it difficult to attribute responsibility to a specific state or actor.
Q: What are some unresolved legal issues regarding cyber warfare under IHL?
A: Whether cyber operations without physical effects trigger IHL, application of neutrality in cyberspace, and regulation of cyber espionage.
Q: What does Rule 53 of Customary International Humanitarian Law prohibit?
A: The use of starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare.
Q: Is the prohibition of starvation applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts?
A: Yes, it is recognized as a norm of customary international law in both types of conflicts.
Q: Which international legal instruments codify the prohibition of starvation in warfare?
A: Article 54(1) of Additional Protocol I, Article 14 of Additional Protocol II, and Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the ICC Statute.
Q: How is siege warfare treated under Rule 53?
A: Siege warfare is not prohibited if its purpose is military, but it must not aim to starve civilians; civilians must be allowed to leave or receive humanitarian aid.
Q: What is the legal status of blockades under Rule 53?
A: Blockades are lawful if they pursue a military objective but must not be used to starve civilians and must allow humanitarian relief.
Q: What are the related rules that reinforce the prohibition of starvation in IHL?
A: Rule 54 (protection of objects indispensable to civilian survival), Rule 55 (access to humanitarian relief), and Rule 56 (protection of humanitarian relief personnel).
Q: What weapon did Israel allegedly use unlawfully in southern Lebanon in October 2023?
A: White phosphorus artillery shells.
Q: Why is the use of white phosphorus in populated areas considered unlawful under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)?
A: Because it is an indiscriminate weapon that fails to distinguish between civilians and military objectives, violating the principles of distinction and proportionality.
Q: In which Lebanese town did Amnesty International document an attack with white phosphorus that may amount to a war crime?
A: Dhayra, on 16 October 2023.
Q: What are the harmful effects of white phosphorus on civilians?
A: It causes severe burns, respiratory damage, organ failure, and uncontrollable fires; it can reignite upon exposure to air.
Q: Under which international treaty is the use of incendiary weapons like white phosphorus regulated?
A: Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) — Lebanon is a party, Israel is not.
Q: What legal classification did Amnesty International give to the Israeli attack on Dhayra?
A: An indiscriminate attack that must be investigated as a potential war crime.
Q: What type of armed conflict is the war in Ukraine classified as under international law according to ODIHR?
A: An International Armed Conflict (IAC).
Q: Which key principles of International Humanitarian Law did the Russian Federation reportedly disregard during hostilities in Ukraine?
A: Distinction, Proportionality, and Precaution.
Q: What incident in Mariupol is highlighted as a possible war crime in the ODIHR report?
A: The airstrike on the Mariupol Drama Theatre, which killed hundreds of civilians sheltering there.
Q: What unlawful method of warfare did the Russian armed forces reportedly use in cities like Mariupol, Chernihiv, and Izium?
A: Siege warfare that deprived civilians of essential goods and humanitarian aid.
Q: What violations involving civilians and occupied territories were documented against the Russian Federation?
A: Forced deportation of civilians, use of filtration camps, extrajudicial executions, torture, sexual violence, and enforced disappearances.
Q: What violations were attributed to Ukrainian armed forces in the report?
A: Placement of military objectives near civilian areas, use of cluster munitions in populated areas, and ill-treatment of suspected looters.
Q: What is the central legal debate discussed in Tim McCormack’s article on targeting data under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)?
A: Whether digital data qualifies as an “object” under IHL and whether its targeting is regulated by the rules of distinction and proportionality.
Q: What was the majority view in the Tallinn Manual 1.0 regarding data as an object under IHL?
A: The majority held that data is not an object because it is intangible and therefore cannot be the direct object of an attack under IHL.
Q: What position did the minority of Tallinn Manual experts take regarding data?
A: They argued that essential civilian data (e.g., health records, tax files) should be considered an object and protected under IHL due to its importance to civilian life.
Q: According to IHL, when can a cyber operation targeting data be classified as an “attack”?
A: When it results in physical damage, injury, death, or destruction of physical infrastructure.
Q: What key concern does McCormack highlight regarding the current IHL position on data?
A: That operations targeting civilian data without causing physical harm may escape IHL regulation, despite their severe humanitarian impact.
Q: What is McCormack’s final position on whether data should be treated as an object under IHL?
A: He supports the minority view, advocating that data should be considered an object to ensure better protection of civilians in cyber warfare.
Q: What aspect of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) governs the use of weapons in armed conflict?
A: Targeting law, which regulates who and what may be lawfully attacked and the precautions that must be taken.
Q: Under Article 36 of Additional Protocol I, what obligation do states have before deploying Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS)?
A: States must conduct a weapons review to ensure that AWS can be used in compliance with IHL.
Q: What is the role of human involvement in AWS operations according to targeting law?
A: Humans are responsible for strategic planning, activation, and oversight of AWS to ensure compliance with IHL principles.
Q: Which IHL principle requires that commanders take feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm when using AWS?
A: Article 57 of Additional Protocol I, which includes obligations of precaution, proportionality, and distinction.
Q: What is the subjective legal assessment that must always be made by a human commander before an AWS attack?
A: The proportionality assessment—determining whether expected civilian harm is excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.
Q: Under IHL, when must an attack be cancelled or suspended during AWS operations?
A: If it becomes apparent that the target is not military, is subject to special protection, or that the attack would cause disproportionate civilian harm.
Q: What type of weapon did the Syrian Air Force extensively use against populated areas during the Syrian conflict?
A: Barrel bombs—improvised aerial explosive devices dropped from helicopters.
Q: Why is the use of barrel bombs in populated areas considered unlawful under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)?
A: Because they are indiscriminate weapons that fail to distinguish between military objectives and civilians, violating the principle of distinction.
Q: What are the humanitarian consequences of the use of barrel bombs in Syria?
A: Mass civilian casualties, destruction of infrastructure, and displacement of civilians.
Q: What legal classification can apply to the Syrian Government’s use of barrel bombs according to the Commission of Inquiry?
A: It may amount to the war crime of targeting civilians and prohibited area bombardment.
Q: How did anti-government armed groups violate IHL during the Syrian conflict?
A: By using mortars, artillery shells, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in an indiscriminate manner, often targeting civilians.
Q: What was the broader objective of the Syrian Government’s barrel bomb campaign, according to the statement?
A: To terrorize the civilian population and demonstrate that civilians were not safe anywhere at any time.
