Wikipedia defines lawfare as: “a method of warfare where law is used as a means of realizing a military objective.”
|A frequently cited use of the term was Charles J. Dunlap, Jr.’s 2001 essay authored for Harvard’s Carr Center. In that essay, Dunlap defines lawfare as “the use of law as a weapon of war”. He later expanded on the definition, explaining lawfare was “the exploitation of real, perceived, or even orchestrated incidents of law-of-war violations being employed as an unconventional means of confronting” a superior military power.|
Colonel Charles Dunlap describes lawfare as “a method of warfare where law is used as a means of realizing a military objective”. In this sense lawfare may be a more humane substitute for military conflict. Colonel Dunlap considers lawfare overall a “cynical manipulation of the rule of law and the humanitarian values it represents”.
|The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the closest thing the world has to a lawfare laboratory. Hamas, Israel, the Palestinian Authority (PA), and their allies are each vigorously waging lawfare, albeit in different ways. This chapter focuses on the PA’s use of law as a weapon against Israel and Israel’s and Israel’s allies responses to that lawfare. |
1)One major element is the campaign to gain recognition of Palestine, as a full sovereign member state of the international community, outside the negotiations process with Israel and any concessions that might require.
2) A second major element is the PA’s decision to join the ICC.
3) A third major element is the PA’s efforts to use the processes of international organizations and treaties, including those to which it is not a party, to advance its claims against Israel.
(Orde F. Kittrie in: Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War)