1 Answer. The international laws of war are generally much easier to apply in the context of a group of people claiming to be a state, than in the context of a group of people who do not claim to be a state. For example, one of the critical questions for classifying an individual under the laws of war is whether the enemy combatant is publicly
Conflict, armed. (relates to state-based) An armed conflict is a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in one calendar year. Comment.
The rules of war are universal. The Geneva Conventions (which are the core element of IHL) have been ratified by all 196 states. Very few international treaties have this level of support. Everyone fighting a war needs to respect IHL, both governmental forces and non-State armed groups. If the rules of war are broken, there are consequences.Abstract: Recent works on collaboration during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945) have contributed much to the field by focusing on the concrete functioning of institutions in occupied China. Yet, a more systematic definition of the process by which these institutions took shape is necessary in order to better understand how state.