论文代写价格：国际人道主义领域的挑战

本篇关于论文代写价格的文章主要是讲关于国际人道主义领域的挑战的内容，由我们加拿大高阶论文代写机构提供。

论文代写价格：国际人道主义领域的挑战

最近在国际人道主义领域出现的一个挑战是，各国是否有能力将每一种战争行为称为恐怖主义行为，即使这些行为是在武装冲突过程中，特别是在非全球武装冲突中通过武装集团进行的。尽管根据国际人道主义法，国际武装冲突的各方可以合法地相互攻击对方的军事目标，但各国仍然不愿理解类似的原则也适用于非全球武装冲突。

因此，沉迷于非全球武装冲突的国家越来越频繁地将任何行为视为恐怖主义行为，即使根据国际人道主义法，国内叛乱分子的行为也不违法。例如，针对军事团体人员的攻击。从这个角度来看，这里显然遗漏了或被忽视了一个事实，即法律制度和管理恐怖主义行为的国际法律制度之间存在本质区别。

论文代写价格：国际人道主义领域的挑战

不同之处在于，《国际人道主义法》的前提是，与军事团体的目标和目的相反的基于暴力的具体行为不能被视为是被禁止的。无论如何，任何恐怖主义行为，就其定义而言，不仅是禁止的，而且是犯罪的。

应牢记区分合法战争行为和恐怖主义行为的要求，以避免将法律制度混为一谈。这在非国际区域的武装冲突中特别重要，在这些冲突中，暴力行为是由武装团体组织起来的，反对在任何情况下仍然存在的军事部队的目标，并受到国内罪行的起诉。除了将这些行为定性为“恐怖主义行为”之外，还可能削弱武装团体遵守国际人道主义法的动机，并可能在随后解决冲突的冲突政治进程中造成障碍。

论文代写价格：国际人道主义领域的挑战

A challenge in IHL that has arose recently lies in the states capability of labelling every warfare act as terrorist act even though it had been committed through armed groups in the armed conflict course, specifically in non-global armed conflicts. Even though it is a general agreement that parties within IAC (International armed conflict) under IHL, might attack lawfully the military objectives of each other but still the states have kept a reluctance to understand that similar principles are applicable within non-global armed conflicts.
Therefore the states that indulge in non-global armed conflicts with increased frequency label any act as an act of terrorists even when under IHL, domestic insurgents as acts are not unlawful. For example, attacks in opposition to the personnel from military groups. From this perspective, it becomes apparent that there is something missing here or has been overlooked is the fact that there is an essential difference between legal regime’s and IHL that govern terrorist acts.

论文代写价格：国际人道主义领域的挑战
The difference is that IHL has its basis on the premise that specific violence based acts in opposition to the goals and objectives of military groups cannot be considered as prohibited in nature. Any terrorism act, anyhow, by its very definition is not only prohibited but also criminal.
The requirement of differentiating between lawful war acts and terrorism acts should be kept in mind in order to avoid conflating the legal regimes. This is specifically essential within armed conflicts in non-international regions, wherein violence acts are organized through armed groups in opposition to the objectives of military forces remaining in any situation, subjected to the prosecution of domestic crimes. The capability of designating these, in addition as “terrorist acts”, can lead towards diminishing the incentive of armed groups to pay their respect to the laws of IHL and can also cause a barrier in conflict political process subsequently to resolve conflict.