Vojenské Rozhledy

Czech Military Review

Vojenské rozhledy / Czech Military Review Nr. 1/2015: 61-71

Targeting Process on the Example of the Libya CaseReviewed - Review

mjr. Mgr. Terezie Němcová, MPA

Protection of the civilian population against the Gaddafi regime, it was a clear UN mandate for military intervention in Libya in 2011. Not only a new approach to leading the fight against terrorism after 11 September 2001, but also requires a change in approaches to conducting combat operations coalition forces, as shown by the recent armed conflict in Libya, inevitably required a new perspective on the concept and approach to the process of targeting as the process of selecting and prioritizing targets and responding to them in accordance with operational requirements and capabilities of units, synchronization of NATO forces, particularly with regard to collateral damage with an impact on the protection of civilians. And Unified Protector operation is a clear example.

Keywords: Targeting, target, OUP, Libya, collateral damage, international humanitarian law, the process of targeting, evaluation, scheduling, process of synchronization, NATO CDE metodology.

Published: March 15, 2015  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Němcová, T., & MPA, (2015). Targeting Process on the Example of the Libya Case. Czech Military Review, 96(1), 61-71
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Interview about Targeting during OUP [Interview] (February 2012). Informal Meeting with Gen.Charlie Bouchard. Brussels: DELNATO. 2011
    2. C. Bouchard, NATO and Libya - The Commander's view: 'We stayed the course' [Interview] (31. 10. 2011).
    3. J. G. Stravridis, and I. H. Daalder, "NATO's Victory in Libya: The Right Way to Run an Intervention," Foreign Affairs. 2012. Volume 91, p. 4.
    4. NATO, AJP-3.9 - Allied Joint Doctrine For Joint Targeting. 2008.
    5. BOOTHBY, W. H. The Law of Targeting. 1. ed. Oxford UK: OUP Oxford, 2012. ISBN-13: 978-0199696611.
    6. BAKER, J. E. The Role of the lawyer in war, a contextual approach to targeting decisions and the commander. 2003. Chin, 4 Chi J intĺ L 407.
    7. BARUCH, P. S., NAUMANN, N. Warning civilians prior to attack under international law theory and practice. 2010. 87 International Law Studies 359.
    8. BEN-NAFTALI, O., MICHAELI, K. R. We must not make a scarecrow of the law - A legal analysis of the Israeli policy of targeted killings. 2003. 36 Cornell Int'l L J 233.
    9. BOIVIN, A., SANDOZ, Y. The Legal Regime Applicable to Targeting Military Objectives ind the Context of Contemporary Warfare. 2004. Law Review s. 98.
    10. BOUCHARD, C. NATO and Libya - The Commander's view: We střed the course. Interview. 2011.
    11. BROWN, J. M. To Bomb or Not to Bomb? Counterinsurgency, Airpower and Dynamic Targeting. 2007. Air Space Power Journal s. 75-85.
    12. CARBERRY, J. K., HOLCOMB, M. S. Target selection at CFLCC: A lawyer's perspective. 2004. Field Artillery March - June s. 39.
    13. CETINKAYA, O., YILDRIM, Y. Architecture Considerations of Time Sensitive Targeting and NATO TST Tool. 2013. NCI Agency.
    14. CORN, G. S., CORN, G. P. The Law of Operational Targeting: Viewing the LOAC Through an Operational Lens. 2012. Texas International Law Journal, Vol. 47, 337-380.
    15. DARLING, P. Joint Targeting and Air Support in Counterinsurgency, How to Move to Mission Command. 2012. Air and Space Power Journal, s. 49-63.
    16. DASKAL, C. J. The Geography of the Battlefield: a Framework for Detention and Targeting Outside the HOT Conflict Zone. 2013. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 161, No. 5, s. 1165-1234.
    17. FORD, M. Precision targeting and the industrialisation of the Intelligence Cycle on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. 2013. Inteligencia y Securidad 13, s. 221-243, ISSN 1887-293X.
    18. GAUB, F. Six Strategic Lessons learned from Lybia: NATO's Operation Unified Protector. 2012. NATO Defense College.
    19. GORDON, A. Purity of Arms, Preemptive War and Selective Targeting in the Context of Terrorism: General Conceptual and Legal Analyses. 2006. University of Haifa, 29, s. 493-508.
    20. HAIKIMI, M. A. Functional Approach to Targeting and Detention. 2012. Michigan Law Review, Vol. 110, s. 1365-1420.
    21. KABA, M. Targeting the World. 2009. Global Security, s. 32-37.
    22. KNOOPS, G. J. A. Military Criminal Responsibilities for Targeting Suspected Terrorists within (International) Armed Conflicts: Towards a Uniform Framework. 2008. International Criminal Law Review, 8, s. 141-160.
    23. MALER, CH. S. Targeting the city: Debates and silence about the aerial boxing of World War II. 2005. International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 87, No. 859, s. 429-444.
    24. PRICE, B. C. Targeting Top Terrorists, How Leadership Decapitation Contributes to Counterterrorism. 2012. International Security - Harvard College, Vol. 36, No. 4, s. 9-46.
    25. ROMAO, R. Targeting and Adaptation in Combat. 2013. Baltic Security and Defence Review.
    26. STAVRIDIS, J.G., DAALDER, I.H. NATO's Victory in Libya: The Right Way to Run an Intervention. Foreign Affairs. 2012. Volume 91. s. 4
    27. SVENDSEN, A.D.M. NATO, Libya Operations and Intelligence Co-Operation - a Step Forward. Baltic Security and Defense Review. 2011. Volume 13 (2), s. 51-60
    28. TYLOR, C. Military Operations in Libya. 2011. Dostupné z <http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN05909>.
    29. WALLACE, D REEVES, S. R. The Law of Armed Conflict's Wicked Problem: Levee en Masse in Cyber Warfare. 2013. International Law Studies, 83 Int'l L. STUD. Vol. 89, s. 646-668.
    30. WALLENSTEEN, P. GRUSELL, H. Targeting the Right Targets? The UN Use of Individual Sanctions. 2012. Global Governance 18, s. 207-230.
    31. ADDP 3.14. Targeting. 2006. Australian Defence Doctrine Publication.
    32. AJP-3.9. Allied Joint Doctrine for Joint Targeting. 2008.
    33. AJP-3.9.2. Land Targeting. Brusel: May 2006. NATO, 38 s.
    34. FM 3-60 (FM 6-20-10) Field Manual. The Targeting Process. 2010. Washington, HQ US Army.
    35. JP 2-01.1 Joint Publication. Joint Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Intelligence Support to Targeting. 9 January 2003. USAF.
    36. JP 3-05.5 Joint Publication. Joint Special Operations Targeting and Mission Planning Procedures. 10 August 1993, USN.
    37. JP 3-09 Joint Publication. Joint Fire Support. 13 November 2006. HQ US Army.
    38. JP 3-09.1 Joint Publication. Joint Tactics, Techniques and Procedures for Laser Designation Operations. 28 May 1999. US Navy.
    39. JP 3-60 Joint Publication. Joint Targeting. 31. January 2013. HQ US Army.
    40. JP 3-60 Joint Doctrine for Targeting. 17 January 2002. HQ US Army.
    41. Joint Fires and Targeting Handbook. 19 October 2007. JWC Suffolk Virginia, JCD Norfolk Virginia, US Air Force, US Army.
    42. Multi-Service Publication FM 90-36/MCRP 3-1.6/NWP 3-60 TP/AFTTP(I) 3-2.3, The Joint Targeting Process and Procedures for Targeting Time-Critical Targets.
    43. Multi-Service Publication FM 90-43/MCRP 3-42.1A/NWP 3-01.13/AFTTP(I) 3-2.24, Multiservice Procedures for Joint Theater Missile Target Development

    Return to the content