무력충돌시 동물의 보호에 관한 일고찰

초록

Armed conflict is the worst creation of man. The adverse effects of armed conflict on humans, the environment and ecosystems are enormous, and the international community has made unstinting efforts to prevent armed conflict. In armed conflict, humans can be both victors and losers. However, unlike humans, the environment and ecosystem are always victims in armed conflict, and above all, animals face a terrible fate in armed conflict. The history of the law of armed conflict began with the history of international law. The horrors of war were imprinted on the conscience of the international community through the two world wars, and the international community's efforts to prevent the destruction of this conscience were reflected in the law of armed conflict. In the law of armed conflict, humans enjoys the rights and bear the responsibilities according to their respective status as combatants and civilians. However, it should not be forgotten that humans are not the only ones involved in armed conflict. Historically, animals have suffered horribly in armed conflict and have been frequently mobilized in armed conflict against their will. Animals are sacrificed for certain military operations and are subject to poaching, trafficking and looting in situations of armed conflict. Despite the substantive involvement of animals in armed conflict, the law of armed conflict is virtually silent about the protection of animals in armed conflict. Animals can be protected in times of armed conflict by applying the provisions related to the protection of civilians and civilian objects under the law of armed conflict to animals. However, under the military necessity, the protection of animals is still limited. In this context, the necessity of making an law of armed conflict that directly regulates the protection of animals and the rights they can enjoy is being suggested. However, it is considered difficult to make an armed conflict law that directly regulates the protection of animals during armed conflict, because the law is based on a people-centric perspective and the anthropocene perspective. Without the overcoming of an anthropocentric view, animals will only be protected to a very limited extent during armed conflict. If animals are not regarded as an separate category rather than humans or objects under the law of armed conflict, it will be difficult to expect adequate protection for animals during armed conflict.

키워드