Tools of Legitimacy: Understanding the relationship between Non-state Armed Groups and International Humanitarian Law

In the past decade, the growth and action of non-state armed groups (NSAGs) has become increasingly prevalent. Despite the extreme variance in size, organization, and goals, non-state armed groups have posed a unique threat to the international community as a whole. By analyzing how international humanitarian law (IHL), such as the Geneva Convention, impacts the behavior and actions of NSAGs, it allows a more dynamic understanding of how current international legal structures truly hampers human rights abuses pertaining to NSAGs, as well calls into question how NSAGs who occupy territory utilize IHL to gain legitimacy on the international stage. Lastly, it also contributes to a deeper understanding of how NSAGs operate within the larger world order. Data gathered from non-government organizations, such as the Geneva Call Database, the Small Arms Survey, and the Peace Research Institute of Oslo to then identify what data has been gathered on the actual cooperation and carrying out of the obligations. This will also be further understood by analysing the specific NSAG’s ideology as evident in handbooks and their relationships and actions with civilians and neighboring states. This data has shown that non-state armed groups which enter into any sort of written recognition of the obligations established by the Geneva Convention and other international humanitarian law do so to gain legitimacy in the views of states and non-government organizations. I also argue that groups which have control over territory and are in regular contact with states are more likely to utilize methods of written agreement to acknowledge international humanitarian law.