General (GEN) Tommy Franks, the U.S. Army former Commander of CENTCOM, has also defended Americas decision to go to war against the Saddam dictatorship in Iraq, stating that: The intelligence, while not precise, was overwhelming. During this sudden uprising, violence was unleashed by angry Albanian mobs against the minority Serb population throughout Kosovo Province. document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. But if you see something that doesn't look right, click here to contact us! It is binding on you as a member of thearmed forces of your State. It requires that the wounded, sick and shipwrecked be collected and cared for. It was considered that this LOAC classification change would not only give more formal legal protection to the captured terrorists and extremist insurgents, but also automatically rule out any further use of enhanced interrogation techniques to extract actionable intelligence from the detainees no matter how effective or successful they were which advocates of the classification change deemed inhumane and a form of torture illegal under CIL (see endnote for a discussion on torture, and refer to American President George W. Bushs argument provided in endnote #30 above). [35] Modified images taken from the International Herald Tribune, www.iht.com, and ABC News, www.abc.news,(accessed 14 January 2011). As military professionals, [Tommy] Franks and I spent many hours examining the reasons for attacking Iraq, and asking ourselves if they were sound. 5, 7. It recognizes that the application of these rules does not affect the legal status of the parties to the conflict. Over 190 states follow the Geneva Conventions because of the belief that some battlefield behaviors are so heinous and damaging, they harm the entire international community. Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War ADOPTED 12 August 1949 BY the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva from 21 April to 12 August 1949 Share View ratification status by country Table of Contents Part I Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/geneva-convention, medical personnel, facilities and equipment, wounded and sick civilians accompanying military forces, civilians who take up arms to fight invading forces, hospital ships cannot be used for any military purpose nor captured or attacked, captured religious leaders must be returned immediately, all sides must attempt to rescue any shipwrecked personnel, even those from another side of the conflict, theyre only required to give their name, rank, birth date and serial number when captured, they must receive suitable housing and adequate amounts of food, they must not be discriminated against for any reason, they have the right to correspond with family and receive care packages, the Red Cross has the right to visit them and examine their living conditions. [23] However, because CIL is based on historical experience and general international consensus with regard to legal obligations, norms and practices during armed conflict, it is continually changing as modern conflict evolves, meaning that the CIL legal obligations of States may change without any formal notification at all. Still is to this day. [31] [Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2006] see S.C. Welsh, Terrorism Detainees: Geneva Convention Common Article 3, Centre for Defense Information Law Project, 2006, p.1, www.cdi.org, (accessed 16 January 2007) and L. Greenhouse, Supreme Court Blocks Guantnamo Tribunals, New York Times, 29 June 2006, https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/29/washington/29cnd-scotus.html, (accessed 23 April 2019). All cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance. Saddam nonetheless continued to play games with the inspectors and the international community. Articles with the HISTORY.com Editors byline have been written or edited by the HISTORY.com editors, including Amanda Onion, Missy Sullivan and Matt Mullen. For much of mankinds history, the ground rules of warfare were hit or miss, if they existed at all. The principle of humane treatment in IHL requires that those who fall into the hands of the enemy be treated with respect for their dignity as human beings. Few practices and norms of CIL with regard to conflict and the conduct of war have not been codified into LOAC legislation. Indeed, it seemed to the U.S. government that they were in unchartered LOAC territory faced with a new class of non-State, unlawful combatant, in a new kind of international war against non-State terrorist militants and their State supporters/protectors, that was neither foreseen nor governed by the laws of war contained in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. As military professionals, [Tommy] Franks and I spent many hours examining the reasons for attacking Iraq, and asking ourselves if they were sound. International treaties, agreements, pacts, conventions and protocols (including the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols); International customs or practices that are so consistently repeated in modern warfare that they are accepted by States as binding law, also known as Customary International Law; Common principles of law generally recognised by civilised nations; Judicial decisions of international courts; and the. Still is to this day. No doubt the procedure was tough, but medical experts assured the CIA that it did no lasting harm. Other emblems were later recognized, and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the main topic of this article, confirmed them all. Between 2001-2006, Al Qaeda terrorists and local/foreign extremist insurgents captured in the territories of Afghanistan or Iraq committing acts of terror or violence against either Allied coalition forces or the new national governments, their forces, or their civilian population, were classed by the United States (U.S.) as, Under this classification of the LOAC, Taliban and Al Qaeda militants were, This absence of legal entitlement to the LOAC protections afforded to lawful armed combatants was strengthened further by the fact that these Islamist terrorists and insurgents conducted their operations out of uniform, failed to distinguish themselves from the civilian population thereby exposing innocents to harm, deliberately targeted innocent civilians themselves in terrorist attacks, forcibly used civilians as human shields to protect themselves from legitimate military responses provoked by their attacks, and, In short, as terrorists or terror-using insurgents in conflict theatres i.e. In a clinical sense, any armed conflict that does not conform to the IAC definition provided in Common Article 2 of the Geneva Conventions or Article 1 of Additional Protocol I must ipso facto be regarded and treated as a NIAC armed conflict. No one size fits all legal approach to terrorism, particularly as to the judicial nature of the situation and the classification of suspected terrorists, is, or has proved to be, feasible in practice., With regard to the highly controversial Iraq War, the U.S. Marine Corps former Deputy Commander of U.S. CENTCOM, Lieutenant General (LTGEN) Michael DeLong, stated in 2007 that: Although we wondered about the timing, we never wondered about the rightness of removing Saddam from power. Further, additional regulations regarding the treatment of civilians were introduced. With respect to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, they were negotiated after World War II. The circumstances of each will determine whether it legally and factually meets the qualifying conditions as an armed conflict (international or non-international). [28], Between 2001-2006, Al Qaeda terrorists and local/foreign extremist insurgents captured in the territories of Afghanistan or Iraq committing acts of terror or violence against either Allied coalition forces or the new national governments, their forces, or their civilian population, were classed by the United States (U.S.) as non-State and unlawful Enemy combatants of International armed conflicts between States under the LOAC (where unlawful Enemy combatant means persons not entitled to combatant immunity who have committed acts in violation of the laws and customs of war during an armed conflict).[29]. There were two that I felt went too far, even if they were legal. In October 1863, delegates from 16 countries along with military medical personnel traveled to Geneva to discuss the terms of a wartime humanitarian agreement. Afghanistan et al.). Out of 194 nations in the world today, 190 are states parties to those 1949 Geneva Conventions. How the malice of the wicked was reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous.[1]. In response, two Protocols Additional to the four 1949 Geneva Conventions were adopted in 1977. Humane treatment includes: (Military Persons Exempt From Attack, pg. unlawful perpetrators of war crimes and excessive human suffering rather than victims these captured unlawful combatants had few rights or protections under the LOAC. A punitive war took place firstly in Afghanistan in 2001 against the Taliban regime hosting and shielding Osama Bin Laden, the leader of the Al Qaeda terrorist network. Learn how your comment data is processed. This report provides an overview of the law of war and the historical treatment of wartime detainees, in particular the United States' practice for determining their . The information the detainees in the CIA program revealed constituted more than half of what the CIA knew about al Qaeda. In addition, these same national forces also failed to prevent, halt, suppress and punish combatants who committed genocide and crimes against humanity against these non-combatant civilians (see blogs , #18 Caveats Endanger & Caveats Kill: National Caveats in UN Operations in Angola, Rwanda & Bosnia-Herzegovina, #21 Srebrenica Aftermath: Serb Guilt & Dutch Liability for the Genocide in the UNPROFOR Safe Area in Bosnia, During this sudden uprising, violence was unleashed by angry Albanian mobs against the minority Serb population throughout Kosovo Province. As a result of this ambiguity under the LOAC surrounding lawful interrogation techniques versus true, unlawful torture, intense and controversial debate about these matters raged between 2006-2008, and continue to the present day. [15], CIL refers to practices in warfare that are so consistently upheld and adhered to by a majority of States on the world stage that they have become generally regarded as law. Counter to expectation, it has in fact been Non-International, rather than International, armed conflict that has predominated in theatres of conflict around the world since the end of WWII, and which still continues to represent the majority of armed conflicts today. in the 1970's, any form of terrorism violates the human rights agreements and expectations ratified by many nations. Yet as even a cursory examination of the history of the nation's laws of war shows, presidents from Washington to Reagan and beyond have long championed the idea of humane treatment of prisoners . This means that ratified laws of the LOAC must be applied and adhered to by the nations armed forces at all times during peacetime, during war, and during all the various stages of the war spectrum in-between these conflict poles, ranging from non-kinetic and non-traditional peacekeeping operations, at one end of the spectrum, to overtly kinetic, offensive warfare operations, on the other. The controversy especially concerned Americas use of CIA/Department of Justice government-approved enhanced interrogation techniques to extract information from approximately 33 uncooperative detainees on plans for future terrorist attacks and the members and organisational structure of the Al Qaeda terrorist network. After all, the State government regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq were indeed both clearly and successfully removed through warfare by a coalition of other States, and while the conflict evolved over time in both theatres to include multiple, non-State, regional insurgencies of extremist fighters waging war against both allied coalition forces and the new government apparatus of these States, the original coalition of States remained heavily involved in the prosecution of these wars towards the original goals of eliminating hostile Al Qaeda and other terrorist networks in these States and preventing any reestablishment of the terrorist networks in these States that would again present a direct threat to America and other freedom-loving, democratic nations around the world. Alluded to briefly in Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and then much more fully in Additional Protocol II of 1977, Non-International armed conflict refers to all armed conflict that takes place: In the territory of a High Contracting Party [State] between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement this Protocol. [22] Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions 1949. Family homes in Serbian towns and villages in Kosovo Province were set on fire or destroyed by violent Albanian rioters during the Kosovo Riots of 17-19 March 2004.[3]. 13, 17; GC, Art. That was not true. While it is true that the criminal behaviour of terrorist unlawful combatants never negates the obligations and duties of lawful combatant military personnel to act in an upright manner in their own decisions and actions (the law of Tu Quoque/You also being no defence for crimes committed against the LOAC), by respecting, adhering to, and upholding the LOAC themselves in their comportment at all times within an armed conflict, the basic lack of reciprocity in the ongoing criminal nature, behaviour and deliberate intent of terrorist and terror-using combatants does continue to challenge and frustrate contemporary thinking on the matter. In cases where there is any doubt as to a conflicts rightful legal classification, moreover, that war can be designated a mixed armed conflict, a designation which activates the full body of the LOAC to the conflict, regardless of classification difficulties, thereby ensuring the protection of war victims in that conflict in accordance with the abiding spirit and goal of the Geneva Conventions. To better illustrate this point, the following comprises a list of the known various terrorist plots and attacks that were prevented or stopped by the U.S. as a result of the CIAs enhanced interrogation programme during the early 2000s (among many other terrorist plots that remain classified and are therefore unknown to the general public): (1) the 2002 U.S. West Coast Airliner Plot; (6) the 2004 United Kingdom (UK) Urban Targets Plot; Furthermore, according to the U.S. Department of Defense, as a direct result of the enhanced interrogation program the CIA was also able to successfully: (Bush, Decision Points, ibid., p. 171; United States Department of Defense (U.S. DoD), Summary of the High Value Terrorist Detainee Program, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Washington DC 20511, Military Commission Proceedings at Guantanamo Bay, 2008, http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/Detainee_Affairs/, (accessed 12 September 2008); U.S. DoD, JTF-GTMO Information on Detainees, Military Commission Proceedings at Guantanamo Bay, 4 March 2005, http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/Detainee_Affairs/, (accessed 12 September 2008)). The U.N. calls for the humane treatment of prisoners of war, citing talk of summary executions. Under this classification of the LOAC, Taliban and Al Qaeda militants were not entitled to the Prisoner of War (PW) protections given to lawful combatants under Geneva Convention III, nor entitled to any protections from any of the other three Geneva Conventions (regarding lawful combatants that are hors de combat on land or at sea, and protections given to civilians), that together govern International Armed Conflict. In 1929, updates were made to further the civilized treatment of prisoners of war. The Court rejected this argument andheld that consent exised since September 11, 2001, through an Authorization for Use of Military Forces (AUMF), a Congressional resolution which empowered the President to use all necessary and appropriate forces against any nations, organizations, or personsthat he determinedto have planned, authorized,committed, or aided in the September 11, 2001attacks. Had I not authorized waterboarding on senior al Qaeda leaders, I would have had to accept a greater risk that the country would be attacked. The CIA interrogation program saved lives. If judges are honest and the compass of justice truly points north in law-abiding nations, to whom members of the armed forces belong, then any individual member of the Armed Forces who disobeyed superior orders that were manifestly illegal under the LOAC, in order to uphold the binding obligations and rights under the LOAC, ought not fail to be exonerated of any crime or wrong-doing during any subsequent civilian or military trial. By 2003, most governments and intelligence services had concluded that Saddam had been successful in resuming his weapons programs. Counter to expectation, it has in fact been Non-International, rather than International, armed conflict that has predominated in theatres of conflict around the world since the end of WWII, and which still continues to represent the majority of armed conflicts today. One of the treaties created during the 1949 Convention, this defined "Prisoner of War," and accorded such prisoners proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention. None of us doubted in the early 1990s that, just as soon as he could, Saddam would resume the programs he had under way before the [Gulf] war to develop biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. In the following blog, #25 Laws of War Brief (Part 2): The Protections, Rights & Obligations of Civilian Non-Combatants & Military Combatants under the LOAC , I will continue this analysis by presenting what is, to the best of my understanding, the most important, mandatory and need-to-know obligations of the LOAC and CIL on all individual military personnel of national armed forces of all ranks, all Services, and all nations around the world. 4 of 8) It does not justify prohibited actions (correct) It justifies the use of overwhelming force, but not wanton destruction (correct) Humanity is a principle of the Law of War that addresses the immunity of peaceful populations and civilian objects from attack. CIL refers to practices in warfare that are so consistently upheld and adhered to by a majority of States on the world stage that they have become generally regarded as law. The Conventions apply to a signatory nation even if the opposing nation is not a signatory, but only if the opposing nation "accepts and applies the provisions" of the Conventions. In addition, these same national forces also failed to prevent, halt, suppress and punish combatants who committed genocide and crimes against humanity against these non-combatant civilians (see blogs #18 Caveats Endanger & Caveats Kill: National Caveats in UN Operations in Angola, Rwanda & Bosnia-Herzegovina, #20 Betrayal & Barbarism in Bosnia: The UNPROFOR Operation, National Caveats & Genocide in the Srebrenica UN Protected Area, #21 Srebrenica Aftermath: Serb Guilt & Dutch Liability for the Genocide in the UNPROFOR Safe Area in Bosnia,and#22 Recommended Viewing: The UN, National Caveats & Human Carnage in Rwanda). The amendments extended protections for those wounded or captured in battle as well as volunteer agencies and medical personnel tasked with treating, transporting and removing the wounded and killed. Common Article 3 the article common to all four of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 which alone treats Non-International armed conflict requires that, in addition to, In essence this means that, according to CIL, States acting as Detaining Powers must provide persons under their power with the most humane (human) treatment that each State is capable of providing, including adequate food and medical care, and that they should. Robert Gates, the U.S. Secretary of Defense under both the Bush and Obama Administrations from 2006-2011, likewise supported the U.S.-led coalitions war to remove Saddam Husseins regime. Geneva, 6 July 1906. International Committee of the Red Cross.Treaties, States, Parties, and Commentaries: Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977. International Committee of the Red Cross.Treaties, States Parties, and Commentaries: Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 8 June 1977. International Committee of the Red Cross. pp. British Red Cross.Treaties, States Parties, and Commentaries: Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field. This paper also sets out international law requirements governing prisoners of war and so-called "unlawful combatants," including humane treatment, interrogation and prosecution. No one size fits all legal approach to terrorism, particularly as to the judicial nature of the situation and the classification of suspected terrorists, is, or has proved to be, feasible in practice.[38], Two slides taken from the Google TimeLapse terrorism project, which has tracked and displayed terrorist attacks that occur worldwide each year over a twenty-year period from 1997-2017.[39].
Brain Imaging for Global Health