Unfortunately, everyone knows the meaning of warfare.
For some time we have now also lawfare, being: use of law as a weapon of war, or more precise: exploitation of real, perceived, or even orchestrated incidents of law-of-war violations being employed as an unconventional means of confronting a military power.
Crimes against humanity (purposely targeting civilians) were first seen during wartime. In the previous century, it was unthinkable that such atrocities would happen in peacetime, so these cruelties are frequently called war crimes. However, because such viciousness especially is committed by modern terrorists, it’s high time to identify crimes against humanity (intentionally aiming to hurt civilians) also in peacetime – not only during war.
And lately, there are attempts to hold people financially accountable for damage specifically perpetrated by terrorists. Terrorists have enablers and inciters. Going after the latter aspires to make war criminals and their assistants pay – (war) crime doesn’t pay. Let’s call that doughfare.
Terrorist per definition can only be fought or forced to surrender and cannot be held to any agreement. Yet their enablers can be held accountable. Doughfare seems to me an idea whose time has come.
Two very recent examples: MH 17 Mystery and American Lawyers and Court: PA, terrorists liable for NIS 62 million for 2001 murder of 3 Israelis. 62,000,000 ILS =17,628,303.42USD. Nice dough.
Of course, just like warfare and lawfare, doughfare can be abused, started by the villains. But especially for that reason, doughfare should not be a monopoly of the bad guys. So my advice: sue them!