(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Truce, Cease-Fire and Armistice: The Legal Nuances [1]

['Patrick J. Lyons']

Date: 2016-02-23

Truce, cessation of hostilities, cease-fire, armistice — these terms are often used interchangeably these days, as if they were synonyms.

But while their meanings overlap, they do not say exactly the same thing. The distinctions may have blurred, but they are still important to diplomats and experts in international law. Here is a short guide.

Strictly speaking, a truce is an informal halt in fighting. They are typically arranged locally — think of enemy commanders agreeing under a white flag to allow each side some time to evacuate casualties from a battlefield. Truces tend to be brief and temporary, and do not necessarily signal any willingness to settle the larger conflict.

A cessation of hostilities is broader and more formal than a truce, but is not quite a cease-fire agreement. One or both sides declare that they will suspend fighting over all. Cessations are usually meant to be the start of a larger peace process, but they are provisional and nonbinding, and in a conflict that involves many parties, like the civil war in Syria, the cessation may apply to only some opponents.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/middleeast/truce-cease-fire-and-armistice-the-legal-nuances.html

Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.