| | Gary Walsh, Interoperability Of United States And Canadian Armed Forces, 15 Duke J. of Comp. & Int'l L. 315 (2005) (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22) |
 | | However, the Canadian Forces may not use anti-personnel mines other than those that are command-detonated and may not request the non-party State, such as the U.S., to use anti-personnel mines in the defense of the Canadian Forces. |
 | | In the example above, if the combined force is under the command and control of a U.S. commander, the Canadian Force would recognize the right of the U.S. Force to defend itself through the use of anti-personnel mines, although the Canadian Force could not be actively involved in the planning or emplacement of the mines. |
 | | In this instance, the differing authority for the use of deadly force in self-defense and defense of property was resolved with the issuance of ROE specific to the Canadian contingent. |
| www.law.duke.edu /journals/djcil/articles/djcil15p315.htm (5278 words) |