Rules of engagement: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:16, 7 April 2007

Latest revision as of 22:38, 13 July 2025

(308 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Internal limits, authorizations and directives on use of force in combat}}

{{otheruses}}

{{Other uses|Rules of Engagement (disambiguation)}}

{{globalize|date=April 2014}}

[[ImageFile:Operation Provide Relief.Rules of Engagement.jpg|thumb|Rules of Engagementengagement for [[Operation Provide Relief]], 1992.]]

'''Rules of engagement''' ('''ROE''') are the internal rules or directives afforded [[military forces]] (including individuals) that define the circumstances, conditions, degree, and manner in which the [[use of force]], or actions which might be construed as provocative, may be applied.<ref>Ashley J. Roach, “Rules of Engagement”, in ''Readings on International Law from the Naval War College Review'', 1978-1994, edited by John Norton Moore and Robert F. Turner, Newport, Naval War College, 1995 (International Law Studies, 68), p. 479. See also in ''Naval War College Review'', vol. 36., n. 1, January-February 1983, p. 46-55.</ref>

[[Image:Operation Provide Relief.Rules of Engagement.jpg|thumb|Rules of Engagement for [[Operation Provide Relief]], 1992.]]

They provide authorization for and/or limits on, among other things, the use of force and the employment of certain specific capabilities. In some [[nation]]s, articulated ROE have the status of guidance to military forces, while in other nations, ROE constitute lawful command. Rules of engagement do not normally dictate how a result is to be achieved, but will indicate what measures may be unacceptable.<ref>Cole, Drew, McLaughlin, Mandsager, San Remo Rules of Engagement Handbook (San Remo: International Institute for Humanitarian Law, 2009).</ref>

In [[military]] or [[police]] operations, the '''rules of engagement''' ('''ROE''') determine when, where and how force shall be used. Such rules are both general and specific, and there have been large variations between cultures throughout history. The rules may be made public, as in a [[martial law]] or [[curfew]] situation, but are typically only fully known to the force that intends to use them.

While ROE is used in both domestic and international operations by some militaries, ROE is not used for domestic operations in the [[United States]]. Instead, the use of force by the [[U.S. military]] in such situations is governed by Rules for the Use of Force (RUF).

==British Military ROE==

The British [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defence]] officially defines ROE as:

An abbreviated description of the rules of engagement may be issued to all personnel. Commonly referred to as a "ROE card", this document provides the [[soldier]] with a summary of the ROE regulating the use of force for a particular mission.<ref>Cole, Drew, McLaughlin, Manageress, San Remo Rules of Engagement Handbook (San Remo: International Institute for Humanitarian Law, 2009)p.71</ref>

:"Directives issued by competent military authority which delineate the circumstances and limitations under which UK forces will initiate and/or continue [[combat]] engagement with other forces encountered." [http://www.tpub.com/content/USMC/mcwp323/css/mcwp323_76.htm]

==Authoritative sources==

The ROE deal with four issues [2]:

While many countries have their own rules of engagement documents, many others do not. There are two primary international rules of engagement manuals that are internationally available: [[NATO]] ''ROE Manual MC 362-1'' (restricted to [[NATO]] and [[Partnership for Peace]] countries); and the ''San Remo Rules of Engagement Handbook'', which is freely available to all on the International Institute of Humanitarian Law (IIHL) website. Created for the [[International Institute of Humanitarian Law|IIHL]] by Commander Alan Cole, Major Phillip Drew, Captain Rob McLaughlin and Professor Dennis Mandsager, the ''San Remo ROE Handbook'' has been translated from its [[English language|English]] original into [[French language|French]], [[Chinese language|Chinese]], [[Arabic]], [[Spanish language|Spanish]], [[Hungarian language|Hungarian]], [[Russian language|Russian]], [[Bosnian language|Bosnian]], and [[Thai language|Thai]] and several other languages.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://iihl.org/rules-of-engagement/|title=Rules of engagement}}</ref> Several countries, such as the UK, have used the [[San Remo Manual]] as a model for creating their own ROE systems.<ref>{{Cite journal |date=2023 |editor-last=Hayashi |editor-first=Nobuo |title=National Military Manuals on the Law of Armed Conflict |url=https://www.toaep.org/ps-pdf/2-hayashi-third |journal=National Military Manuals on the Law of Armed Conflict |issue=3 |pages=22-51}}</ref>

* When military force may be used,

* Where military force may be used,

* Against whom force should be used in the circumstances described above, and

* How military force should be used to achieve the desired ends.

==Training==

The ROE take two forms: Actions a soldier may take without consulting a higher authority, unless explicitly forbidden (sometimes called 'command by negation') and second, actions that may only be taken if explicitly ordered by a higher authority (sometimes called 'positive command').

The [[International Institute of Humanitarian Law]] in [[Sanremo|San Remo]], Italy conducts rules of engagement training course at least once per year, usually in September. Taught by some of the world's foremost authorities on ROE, the course attracts students from around the globe. Similar training by the San Remo ROE drafting team is conducted for the [[United Nations]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ask.un.org/faq/14531|title=How are Rules of Engagement (ROE) prepared for United Nations peacekeeping missions?|access-date=30 August 2016|archive-date=14 September 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160914155015/http://ask.un.org/faq/14531|url-status=dead}}</ref> staff colleges and other organizations as requested.

In addition to a typically large set of standing orders, military personnel will be given additional rules of engagement before performing any mission or military operation. These can cover circumstances such as how to retaliate after an attack, how to treat captured targets, which territories the soldier is bound to fight into, and how the force should be used during the operation.

The ROE are extremely important:

# They provide a consistent, understandable and repeatable standard on how forces act. Typically they are carefully thought out in detail well in advance of an engagement and may cover a number of scenarios, with different rules for each.

# They assist in the synchronization of political-diplomatic and military components of a strategy by allowing political commanders to better understand, forecast and tailor the actions of a force.

The first rule of engagement for [[British Armed Forces]] is always the right to use force in self-defense.

==U.S. Military ROE==

The 1999 Marine Corps Close Combat Manual (MCRP 3-02B) presents a “Continuum of Force” the following breakdown:

*Level 1: Compliant (Cooperative). The subject responds and complies to verbal commands. Close combat techniques do not apply.

*Level 2: Resistant (Passive). The subject resists verbal commands but complies immediately to any contact controls. Close combat techniques do not apply.

*Level 3: Resistant (Active). The subject initially demonstrates physical resistance. Use compliance techniques to control the situation. Level three incorporates close combat techniques to physically force a subject to comply. Techniques include: Come-along holds, Soft-handed stunning blows, Pain compliance through the use of joint manipulation and the use of pressure points.

*Level 4: Assaultive (Bodily Harm). The subject may physically attack, but does not use a weapon. Use defensive tactics to neutralize the threat. Defensive tactics include: Blocks, Strikes, Kicks, Enhanced pain compliance procedures, Impact weapon blocks and blows.

*Level 5: Assaultive (Lethal Force). The subject usually has a weapon and will either kill or injure someone if he is not stopped immediately and brought under control. The subject must be controlled by the use of deadly force with or without a firearm or weapon.

==ROE failures==

In any engagement, the ROE need to balance two competing goals: The need to use force effectively to accomplish the mission objectives and the need to avoid unnecessary force. This creates room for two types of error:

* Excessively tight ROE can constrain a commander from performing his mission effectively, called a [[Type I error]]. It is typical for the political leadership to constrain the actions of military commanders. This is often a source of tension between the political leaders, who are trying to accomplish a political or diplomatic objective, and the military commanders, who are trying make the most effective use of their forces. Sagan [2] provides an excellent discussion of this topic. The UN Peacekeeper's ROE (see [[UNAMIR]]) during the [[Rwandan Genocide]] is a tragic example of too restrictive ROE.

* Excessively loose ROE can facilitate the escalation of a conflict which, while being tactically effective, negates the political objectives that the use of force was meant to achieve. This is a [[Type II error]] or "escalatory" error and an example of it may be the killing of [[Jean Charles de Menezes|Jean de Menezes]] on [[July 22]],[[2005]].

==Current Issues==

The late 1990s and early 2000s has seen an increase in the use of [[private military contractor|private military contractors]] particularly from United States and Britain. Such contractors are not bound by the same rules of engagement, standing orders, or levels of accountability as are members of a national military force.

==See also==

* [[Category:LawsLaw of war]]

* [[The Moscow Rules]], an example of the use of the ROE term in [[tradecraft]].

* [[IDF Code of Ethics]]

== References ==

{{Reflist}}

# USDOD. [http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/natoterm_index.html DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms: NATO Only Terms]. United States of America: ''Joint Doctrine Division, J-7, Joint Staff, Department of Defense''. December 17, 2003.

# Sagan, Scott D., Rules of Engagement, pp 443 - 470 in: George, A., Avoiding War: Problems of Crisis Management, ISBN 0-8133-1232-9. This well-written analysis provides an excellent overview.

# Private Military Companies, Taljaard, R. Yale Global Online 9 December 2003.[http://www.sandline.com/hotlinks/Yale_Modern-day-mercs.html Modern Day Mercenaries].

== External links ==

[[Category:Laws of war]]

''[http://www.iihl.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ROE-HANDBOOK-ENGLISH.pdf San Remo Handbook on Rules of Engagement]''

{{Authority control}}

[[de{{DEFAULTSORT:Rules ofOf engagement]]Engagement}}

[[Category:Law of war]]

[[he:הוראות פתיחה באש]]

[[it:Regole di ingaggio]]

[[ja:交戦規定]]

[[th:กฎการปะทะ]]