Wallace and Reeves discuss foreseeable above-ground harm from tunnel attacks

Wallace and Reeves discuss foreseeable above-ground harm from tunnel attacks

According to the DoD Law of War Manual, a proportionality analysis should consider any foreseeable and not too remote damage when analyzing incidental loss of civilian life or property, which, in this case, would seem to include damage above ground.

Editorial paraphrase of David A. Wallace and Shane Reeves's written discussion dated 14 November 2023, hosted by the Lieber Institute; not a verbatim quotation of the DoD manual or institutional endorsement. The authors tentatively extend foreseeable civilian-harm analysis to effects above ground. Their surrounding analysis requires distinction, proportionality and feasible precautions, treats exclusively humanitarian tunnels as protected civilian objects, and includes civilian hostages in the analysis. The same article discusses defender obligations; these do not remove attacker obligations. Additional Protocol I Article 51(5)(b) and (8) supplies limiting context (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51). The linked July 2023 DoD manual returned HTTP 403 during this review: its exact text and the authors' interpretation are not independently certified. This record verifies the authors' published discussion only. It does not establish any tunnel's use, foreseeability in a particular attack, casualties, proportionality, wrongdoing or legal liability. The publisher expressly disclaims endorsement and official US military policy.

Wallace and Reeves discuss foreseeable above-ground harm from tunnel attacks

Bottom-source disposition: publisher evidence of author commentary only. Editorial paraphrase of David A. Wallace and Shane Reeves's written discussion dated 14 November 2023, hosted by the Lieber Institute; not a verbatim quotation of the DoD manual or institutional endorsement. The authors tentatively extend foreseeable civilian-harm analysis to effects above ground. Their surrounding analysis requires distinction, proportionality and feasible precautions, treats exclusively humanitarian tunnels as protected civilian objects, and includes civilian hostages in the analysis. The same article discusses defender obligations; these do not remove attacker obligations. Additional Protocol I Article 51(5)(b) and (8) supplies limiting context (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51). The linked July 2023 DoD manual returned HTTP 403 during this review: its exact text and the authors' interpretation are not independently certified. This record verifies the authors' published discussion only. It does not establish any tunnel's use, foreseeability in a particular attack, casualties, proportionality, wrongdoing or legal liability. The publisher expressly disclaims endorsement and official US military policy.