China and International Humanitarian Law

by

Lijiang Zhu

• LAST MODIFIED: 23 September 2024
• DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199796953-0260

Introduction

International humanitarian law (IHL) is a branch of public international law aimed at limiting the means and methods of warfare of the parties to armed conflicts and protecting the victims of armed conflicts, whether international or non-international law, out of humanitarian reasons. The fundamental sprit of IHL, namely to advocate for humanitarianism in armed conflicts, has been deeply rooted in the Chinese history and constituted an important component of Chinese civilizations. The rich Chinese ancient thoughts and practices on humanitarianism necessitates an exploration, as they may have contemporary implications. Today, China is one of the five permanent member states of the Security Council of the United Nations, which assumes a primary responsibility of maintaining international peace and security. China is one of the ten states contributing troops and police to the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and the largest among the five permanent member states of the Security Council of the United Nations. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army is the largest armed force in the world and is increasingly modernized. China does not commit to waiving use of force to settle the Taiwan problem, and has several territorial and maritime disputes with the neighboring countries in land and sea. All these factors render the importance of the topic of “China and international humanitarian law.” This article will present the main bibliographies on the research of this subject matter by Chinese and foreign experts in Chinese and English language. It will first present the research of a general overview of this subject matter, which generally introduces this subject matter and makes comments in Part 1, and then focus on the survey of modern Chinese practice of IHL on some specific years. Chinese history of IHL is a field attracting many researches, so the relevant bibliographies will be introduced later. Apart from the modern practice and history of IHL, the relevant bibliographies focus on sources of IHL, the determination and categorization of armed conflicts that are the preconditions for the applicability of IHL, and the special topic of relevance of IHL with UN peacekeeping operations. In IHL, the two pillars are the rules on means and methods of warfare (Hague Law) and rules on protection of victims affected by armed conflicts (Geneva Law); both have relevant bibliographies. Finally, the implementation of IHL also attracts much research; they will be introduced in the last part. It has to be noted that the criteria of selecting the relevant bibliographies is how well the relevant books or papers specifically address Chinese practice, views, perspectives, contributions, and so on, from either Chinese experts or foreign experts, and whether the topic is a general IHL topic or a topic specifically related to China.

General Overviews

Chen 2003 examines the contribution of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to IHL in terms of treaty ratifications, treaty making, and domestic measures. New China’s contribution to IHL is shown in the making, implementation, and research of IHL. New China ratified the majority of IHL conventions including the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and two additional protocols in 1977. New China has been actively participating in the making of IHL conventions and making suggestions to make new treaties, including the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention. New China joined relevant international organizations, such as the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. New China also takes legislative, administrative, and judicial measures to implement IHL. Greer 2006 shifts the focus to the actual practice of the People’s Republic of China in observance of jus in bello in the past armed conflicts with neighboring states, predicting that the People’s Republic of China will follow jus in bello in future armed conflicts. Liu 2011 offers the tone of an official speech on the observance by the People’s Liberation Army of IHL in an international conference; Meng and Li 2014 presents Chinese practice in the law of armed conflicts in quite a few aspects, in Chinese, and describes Chinese perception of the law of armed conflicts, collects and analyzes Chinese practice in this field, and points out that China respects and observes the treaties on armed conflicts ratified by China. The authors argue that in international armed conflicts, China treated the prisoners of war well, protecting historical relics as well as casualties to civilians. They also argue that in non-international armed conflicts, China also has rich practice in IHL. They also researched nonwar military operations, such as UN peacekeeping operations, counterterrorism operations, anti-piracy operations, and landmine clearance operations. No comprehensive and systematic examination of China and IHL has been conducted and published in English. Zhang 2024 examines China’s contemporary IHL practices, including China’s participation in IHL treaties, its domestic legislations, and its approach to IHL training and education as well as its participation in international rule-making processes.

• Chen Gang. “新中国对国际人道法的贡献.” Journal of Xi’an Politics Institute 16.4 (2003): 51–55.

  English translation of title: Contribution of New China to international humanitarian law. A concise and skeletal survey of PRC’s contribution to IHL before 2003.

• Greer, Jamieson L. “China and the Laws of War: Patterns of Compliance and Disregard.” Virginia Journal of International Law 46.4 (2006): 717–743.

  An interesting discussion on whether the People’s Republic of China (PRC) followed and will follow jus ad bellum and jus in bello on basis of PRC’s past conducts in Korean, Indian, and Vietnamese wars.

• Liu, Daqun. “Chinese Humanitarian Law and International Humanitarian Law.” In The Diversification and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law. Edited by Larissa van den Herik and Carsten Stahn, 347–360. Leiden, The Netherlands, and Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, 2012.

  DOI: 10.1163/9789004236912_013

  An important introduction of Chinese engagement with international humanitarian law from the ancient time to the contemporary era from a Chinese judge of an international criminal tribunal, in particular China’s participation of the trials by the International Military Tribunal for Far East and China’s domestic trials of Japanese war criminals, as well as the position of China on the establishment of a permanent international criminal court.

• Liu, Jixian. “The International Humanitarian Law and Its Practice by the Chinese Armed Forces Keynote Speech at International Conference on International Humanitarian Law and Peace Operations.” Military Law and Law of War Review 50.2 (2011): 593–606.

  DOI: 10.4337/mllwr.2011.02.22

  An officially rhetorical overview of the PRC’s practice in IHL, in particular on treatment of prisoners of war (POWs), protection of cultural property, and regulation of some weapons, and it provides views on how IHL should be understood by the PRC from the perspective of a high PRC military official.

• Meng Fanming, and Li Guozhen. 武装冲突法与中国的实践研究. Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2014.

  English translation of title: Research on Chinese practice in the law of armed conflicts. A book on Chinese practice in the law of armed conflicts from the perspective of two Chinese military lawyers.

• Zhang, Binxin. “China and International Humanitarian Law.” In The Cambridge Handbook of China and International Law. Edited by Ignacio de la Rasilla and Congyan Cai, 302–320. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2024.

  A latest and review of China’s relation with international humanitarian law beginning with the late nineteenth century. It also discusses the role China seeks to play in the emerging unregulated issues of international humanitarian law, including those related to the recent development of new technologies.