Some 13-15,000 French troops are deployed every year on external operations (OPEX) and are redeployed on a four-month roulement in theatres where there is a continuing commitment such as the Balkans, Côte d’Ivoire and Afghanistan. Increasing numbers of these troops are on their third or even fourth operation of this type, with all that implies in terms of danger, stress and family hardship. Their position as military personnel naturally requires them to be available at any time and to be sent anywhere: nevertheless, in peacetime this can become a heavy burden for them to bear.⁽¹⁾

The missions given to the armed forces in operational theatres have changed in nature. Today, they are rarely the combat missions for which military personnel are trained. No longer do they make war as such–more often they are there to separate the warring parties, to help restore public order and peace, to create favourable conditions for a return to democratic political control and occasionally to support and train legitimate national forces on their own ground, as in Afghanistan. For all that, in any theatre the situation could change in an instant, leading to the use of weapons and a sudden, if short, international armed conflict within the meaning of the Geneva Conventions. An example of this was the bombardment of Bouaké, in the autumn of 2004.

Inherent in these changes is an increasingly litigious atmosphere on the battlefield, stemming from the more international nature of operational theatres, the advent of international tribunals and the formalisation of rules of engagement (ROE), all of which are validated by jurists.⁽²⁾ The primary role of the law with regard to external operations is to justify the action of the force, but the law must also protect those who conduct the action in pursuit of the mission, as long as they are acting within the rules of international law.