Don't spam I will report you
If you give the correct answer U will be marked as the brainlists
II.Read the passage
Moved from clearly defined battlefields to populated areas. Traditional war between armies of opposing states is an exception, while non-international conflicts have become the norm. Nowadays, civilians bear the brunt of armed conflicts. International humanitarian law has adapted to this change. Appalled by the destruction and suffering caused by the Second World War, states agreed in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 on comprehensive protection for those who are not or are no longer participating in hostilities — wounded and sick soldiers, prisoners of war and civilians. This cornerstone of international humanitarian law was supplemented in 1977 and 2005 by three additional protocols. The use of certain weapons, such as biological or chemical weapons, cluster munitions and anti-personnel mines is now widely oud-awed. The law has placed barriers to protect the most vulnerable from the brutality of war. Its implementation has also seen a certain amount of progress, such as in the training of soldiers or in the prosecution of the worst war crimes, thanks in particular to the founding of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Nevertheless, regular serious breaches of international humanitarian law are a cause of suffering. Underlying it all is our collective failure. The contracting states undertook in Article 1 — common to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 — “to respect and to ensure respect” for these conventions “in all circumstances.” International humanitarian law has, since its conception, lacked mechanisms for encouraging effective compliance. This impotence has often meant death and destruction for those affected by war. Since the adoption of the first Geneva Convention 150 years ago, international humanitarian law has become a central pillar of the international legal order. Ultimately its provisions serve to protect our key characteristic as human beings: our humanity. This is an irrevocable right. It is based on the belief, forged over centuries and in all our cultures, according to which it is essential to lay down rules if we want to prevent wars from degenerating into barbarism. It is up to our generation to consolidate these achievements and to create an institutional framework to ensure these rules are respected. If it is to be fully effective, the law needs suitable instruments. Never in the history of humankind have we been closer to a solution than we are today. On the basis of your reading of the Passage, answer the following questions briefly. How are today’s wars different from the wars of the 19th century? What is the state of the International humanitarian law’s implementation? What is the reason behind the regular breaches of the International humanitarian law? How can the law become completely effective? Which word in paragraph 1 mans the same as ‘chief impact of a specified action’? Which word in paragraph 2 means ‘dismayed’ or ‘horrified’?
Answers
Answer:
Moved from clearly defined battlefields to populated areas. Traditional war between armies of opposing states is an exception, while non-international conflicts have become the norm. Nowadays, civilians bear the brunt of armed conflicts. International humanitarian law has adapted to this change. Appalled by the destruction and suffering caused by the Second World War, states agreed in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 on comprehensive protection for those who are not or are no longer participating in hostilities — wounded and sick soldiers, prisoners of war and civilians. This cornerstone of international humanitarian law was supplemented in 1977 and 2005 by three additional protocols. The use of certain weapons, such as biological or chemical weapons, cluster munitions and anti-personnel mines is now widely oud-awed. The law has placed barriers to protect the most vulnerable from the brutality of war. Its implementation has also seen a certain amount of progress, such as in the training of soldiers or in the prosecution of the worst war crimes, thanks in particular to the founding of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Nevertheless, regular serious breaches of international humanitarian law are a cause of suffering. Underlying it all is our collective failure. The contracting states undertook in Article 1 — common to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 — “to respect and to ensure respect” for these conventions “in all circumstances.” International humanitarian law has, since its conception, lacked mechanisms for encouraging effective compliance. This impotence has often meant death and destruction for those affected by war. Since the adoption of the first Geneva Convention 150 years ago, international humanitarian law has become a central pillar of the international legal order. Ultimately its provisions serve to protect our key characteristic as human beings: our humanity. This is an irrevocable right. It is based on the belief, forged over centuries and in all our cultures, according to which it is essential to lay down rules if we want to prevent wars from degenerating into barbarism. It is up to our generation to consolidate these achievements and to create an institutional framework to ensure these rules are respected. If it is to be fully effective, the law needs suitable instruments. Never in the history of humankind have we been closer to a solution than we are today.