Al Hassan Symposium – Towards the Acceptance of the Aggregated Violence Approach? is by Chiara Redaelli. The article is published by the Lieber Institute at West Point. 

Lieber Institute Editors’ note: This post is part of a joint symposium hosted by the Armed Groups and International Law and Articles of War blogs. The symposium addresses the ICC’s judgment in the Al Hassan case. The introductory post is available here.

This article represents a critical exploration of international humanitarian law’s (IHL) evolving methodology for classifying non-international armed conflicts (NIACs). Emerging from the International Criminal Court’s landmark judgment against Al Hassan, a former Ansar Dine member, the article meticulously challenges the traditional “fragmented approach” of conflict classification. This approach historically assessed conflict intensity through bilateral relationships between armed groups, disaggregating complex violent scenarios into isolated interactions. However, the analysis argues that such methodology inadequately captures the nuanced, interconnected nature of contemporary armed conflicts, particularly in regions with multiple, dynamically shifting armed groups.

The piece introduces the “aggregated violence approach.” This approach is a sophisticated alternative, drawing from International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) perspectives and multiple scholarly interpretations. Key proposed methodologies include assessing conflict intensity through group coordination, examining temporal and geographical continuums, and evaluating groups fighting against common enemies. By presenting a sliding scale of complex conflict situations, the article suggests a more flexible framework that can accommodate the fluid alliances and decentralized violence characteristic of modern armed conflicts.

Critically, the analysis proposes a theoretical model and grounds its argument in practical challenges observed in conflict zones like Mali, Ethiopia, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The scholarly contribution lies in its nuanced recognition that traditional legal frameworks must evolve to meaningfully address contemporary conflict dynamics. The Al Hassan case could become a watershed moment. It could crystallize the aggregated violence approach into customary international law and offer a more comprehensive mechanism for understanding and legally categorizing complex armed conflicts.