Upload
lethu
View
249
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Geneva Convention (2015)
Reevaluating the Geneva Conventions
Written By: Hanny Ramadan
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 1
Objective of Committee
The Geneva Conventions have been accepted as International Humanitarian Law (IHR)
by most nations in the United Nations. However, domestic activity in countries such as
the United States, China, and Russia threaten the legitimacy of the laws signed to by the
international community. Our mission, as the International Committee of the Red Cross,
is to relay the communications of our individual nations’ concerns with the Geneva
Codes and implement a 21st century enhancement that contains invulnerable legislation
that explicitly prohibits nations from practicing extralegal action. I hope the committee
can most importantly garner full support from the 196 member states of the United
Nations to complete this task. The Geneva Codes are now in your hands and law versed
minds.
Introduction and History
To many legal scholars, the term Jus in Bello means more than just the classic
Latin translation of “law of war”, it is an area of immense dispute. Although, living in the
21st century is comparatively fortunate; prior to the years 1948 and 1949, the years that
the Geneva Conventions were discussed and signed respectively, war crimes were
committed often and tactically—with purpose. World War II is a perfect example of such
systemic atrocity. The Japanese military had been indicted with post-war charges on
several cases of human rights infringements simply noted as “war crimes”. From the
“Sook Ching Massacre” of March 1942 to the “Massacre of Manila” in March of 1945,
the Japanese were culprits of multiple mass murders of hundreds to thousands at times,
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 2
influenced by the intent of war.1 However, the Japanese were not alone. The German
Luftwaffe (Air Force, Battle of Britain)2 and Special Forces establishments such as the
Shutzstaffel (“S.S.”) are infamous for establishing the almost moot conversation on the
word, “genocide”. In fact the Axis Powers were not alone in their actions, the Allied
Powers could only compete with the same caliber from response city bombings to the
event that changed the course of history, the droppings of the atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki initiated by the United States Military.
These nefarious actions collectively transgressed the natural boundaries of two
equipped combatant armies. They took the battlefield out of the restricted area of
combat—it made any town, village, home, and family a victim of combat. This well
surpasses William Tecumseh Sherman’s legacy of a “hard war” or “total war” since not
only were civilians separated from their food and health resources, they were subject to
torture, cruelty, and ultimately death.
To put it simply, there are countless accounts of civilian and military cruelty in
history but World War II is axiomatically regarded as the apex of such crimes. The
Geneva Conventions are, in fact, a massive reaction to the most massive (in casualties)
war in history. By the end of the war, an approximate of 50 million deaths worldwide,
3% of the estimated world population in 1945, had ceased to exist. This is not the
frightening realization—the 50 million that died were only civilians! The war seemed to
1 http://listverse.com/2014/05/06/10-‐japanese-‐atrocities-‐from-‐world-‐war-‐ii/ 2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/battle_of_britain
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 3
be more of a civilian war than that of a military one, for the civilian population’s casualty
count tripled that of the military’s casualty count. 3
Today, the Geneva Conventions are the only legal barrier between an
international conflict and the safety of innocent people. Adjustments must be made to
maintain the security of these documents and the enforcement needed to execute their
standing.
History of the Red Cross
Many are familiar with the eleemosynary activism of Clara Barton and her
integral role in founding the American Red Cross but the advent of a third-party
organization that cares for civilians during times of disaster and war derives from the
mind of Henry (Jean-Henri) Dunant of Geneva, Switzerland. Perhaps, Dunant’s
proclivity for humanitarianism and entrepreneurship and his establishment of the
International Red Cross overshadow the essence of his achievement, his literary
observations. In fact, it was on a journey to meet with Emperor Napoleon III regarding a
land grant that he faced and documented the famous Franco-Austrian Battle of Solferino.
The battle and its aftermath inspired Dunant to write a book detailing his experience, the
battle scene, the battlefield post battle, and a solution to the “miseries” he witnessed. 4 In
short, Dunant was a considerate man who not only wrote of war and war crime but of
lingering slavery and discrimination, notably where he monologues a forgotten
“Musulman” (Muslim) slave population in the United States. Dunant’s efforts predate the
modern Geneva Codes by almost a century but it was only the Red Cross that he
3 http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Second 4 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1901/dunant-‐bio.html
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 4
established which affected the most movement. Dunant lacked one entity in order for his
fantasized plan to legitimize—the United Nations. Today, the United Nations acts as the
enforcement Dunant needed in order for the first Geneva Codes of 1864 to bind nations
under a uniform practice of war.
Geneva Codes Content
As aforementioned, the Geneva Conventions that are acknowledged as IHR today
include texts from 1949, and onward. The codes went through various phases and
conferences through history, even before 1949. In the late 19th century, the Jus in Bello
discussion was resurrected in the Hague Conventions. The following is a timeline of all
the conventions with the exception of the Protocols post-1949.
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 5
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 6
****Dissecting and debating articles in committee is obviously encouraged. For that reason links to all of the articles and codes are attached. Please use references to these articles in your position paper as the following: Example: (Geneva Convention 1864, Article 1) *****
First Geneva Conventions after the Geneva Conference of 1863
“After the successful termination of the Geneva Conference of 1863, the Swiss Federal
Council, on the initiative of the Geneva Committee, invited the governments of all
European and several American states to a diplomatic conference for the purpose of
adopting a convention for the amelioration of the condition of the wounded in war. The
conference, at which 16 states were represented, lasted from 8-22 August 1864. The draft
convention submitted to the conference, which was prepared by the Geneva Committee,
was adopted by the Conference without major alterations. The main principles laid down
in the Convention and maintained by the later Geneva Conventions are:
- relief to the wounded without any distinction as to nationality;
- neutrality (inviolability) of medical personnel and medical establishments and
units;
- the distinctive sign of the red cross on a white ground.
A second diplomatic conference was convened at Geneva in October 1868 in
order to clarify some provisions of the Convention of 1864 and, particularly, to adapt the
principles of the Convention to sea warfare. The Additional Articles, which were adopted
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 7
on 20 October 1868 were, however, not ratified, and did not enter into force.” (From the
International Committee of the Red Cross)
To Find Specific Articles: https://www.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/120?OpenDocument First Geneva Convention of 1949:
“This Convention represents the fourth version of the Geneva Convention on the
wounded and sick after those adopted in 1864, 1906 and 1929. The fundamental
principles as well as the division into chapters remained the same as in the preceding
version with the exception of the new introductory chapter on general provisions.
Changes were made especially in Chapter IV (personnel). Hitherto, medical personnel
and chaplains falling into enemy hands had to be immediately repatriated. The 1949
Convention, taking account of changed conditions of warfare, provides that they may in
certain circumstances be retained to care for prisoners of war. The provisions on medical
equipment were correspondingly altered. In the chapter on medical transports it was
provided that medical aircraft may in certain circumstances fly over neutral territory.
Some clarifications were made as regards the article on the use of the emblem (Article
44).”
To Find Specific Articles: https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=4825657B0C7E6BF0C12563CD002D6B0B&action=openDocument Second Geneva Convention of 1949:
“The present Convention replaced Hague Convention (X) of 1907 for the Adaptation to
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 8
Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention.
It contains 63 Articles whereas the 1907 Convention had only 28. This extension is
mainly due to the fact that the present Convention is conceived as a complete and
independent Convention whereas the 1907 Convention restricted itself to adapting to
maritime warfare the principles of the Convention on the wounded and sick in land
warfare. In its structure the 1949 Convention follows closely the provisions of Geneva
Convention (I) of 1949.”
To Find Specific Articles: https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=2F5AA9B07AB61934C12563CD002D6B25&action=openDocument Third Geneva Convention of 1949:
“The present Convention replaced the Prisoners of War Convention of 1929. It contains
143 Articles whereas the 1929 Convention had only 97. It became necessary to revise the
1929 Convention on a number of points owing to the changes that had occurred in the
conduct of warfare and the consequences thereof, as well as in the living condition of
peoples. Experience had shown that the daily life of prisoners depended specifically on
the interpretation given to the general regulations. Consequently, certain regulations were
given a more explicit form which was lacking in the preceding provisions. Since the text
of the Convention is to be posted in all prisoner of war camps (see Article 41) it has to be
comprehensible not only to the authorities but also to the ordinary reader at any time. The
categories of persons entitled to prisoner of war status were broadened in accordance
with Conventions I and II. The conditions and places of captivity were more precisely
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 9
defined, in particular with regard to the labour of prisoners of war, their financial
resources, the relief they receive and the judicial proceedings instituted against them. The
Convention establishes the principle that prisoners of war shall be released and
repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities (Article 118)”
To Find Specific Articles: https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=77CB9983BE01D004C12563CD002D6B3E&action=openDocument Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949:
“The Geneva Conventions which were adopted before 1949 were concerned with
combatants only, not with civilians. Some provisions concerning the protection of
populations against the consequences of war and their protection in occupied territories
are contained in the Regulations concerning the laws and customs of war on land,
annexed to the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. During World War I the Hague
provisions proved to be insufficient in view of the dangers originating from air warfare
and of the problems relating to the treatment of civilians in enemy territory and in
occupied territories. The International Conferences of the Red Cross of the 1920's took
the first steps towards laying down supplementary rules for the protection of civilians in
time of war.
The 1929 Diplomatic Conference, which revised the Geneva Convention on wounded
and sick and drew up the Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war, limited itself
to recommending that "studies should be made with a view to concluding a convention
on the protection of civilians in enemy territory and in enemy occupied territory." A draft
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 10
convention containing forty articles prepared by the International Committee of the Red
Cross was approved by the International Conference of the Red Cross in Tokyo in 1934
and is generally referred to as the "Tokyo Draft". It was to be submitted to a diplomatic
conference planned for 1940, but this was postponed on account of the war. The events of
World War II showed the disastrous consequences of the absence of a convention for the
protection of civilians in wartime.
The Convention adopted in 1949 takes account of the experiences of World War II. It
contains a rather short part concerning the general protection of populations against
certain consequences of war (Part II), leaving aside the problem of the limitation of the
use of weapons. The great bulk of the Convention (Part III - Articles 27-141) puts forth
the regulations governing the status and treatment of protected persons; these provisions
distinguish between the situation of foreigners on the territory of one of the parties to the
conflict and that of civilians in occupied territory.
The Convention does not invalidate the provisions of the Hague Regulations of 1907 on
the same subjects but is supplementary to them (see Article 154 of the Convention).”
To Find Specific Articles: https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=AE2D398352C5B028C12563CD002D6B5C&action=openDocument Protocol I of 1977:
“Article 1(4) provides that armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial
domination, alien occupation or racist regimes are to be considered international
conflicts.
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 11
Part II (Articles 8-34) develops the rules of the First and the Second Geneva Conventions
on wounded, sick and shipwrecked. It extends the protection of the Conventions to
civilian medical personnel, equipment and supplies and to civilian units and transports
and contains detailed provisions on medical transportation.
Part III and several chapters of Part IV (Articles 35-60) deal with the conduct of
hostilities, i.e. questions that hitherto were regulated by the Hague Conventions of 1899
and 1907 and by customary international law. Their reaffirmation and development is
important in view of the age of the Hague Conventions and of the new States which had
no part in their elaboration. Article 43 and 44 give a new definition of armed forces and
combatants. Among the most important Articles are those on the protection of the civilian
population against the effects of hostilities. They contain a definition of military
objectives and prohibitions of attack on civilian persons and objects. Further Articles (61-
79) deal with the protection of civil defense organizations, relief actions and the treatment
of persons in the power of a party to a conflict.
Part V (Articles 80-91) brings some new elements to the problem of the execution of the
Conventions and the Protocol.”
To find specific articles: https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=D9E6B6264D7723C3C12563CD002D6CE4&action=openDocument
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 12
PROTOCOL I and II:
The final two protocols of the Geneva Codes deal with matters of the organization’s
symbol and emblem usage. They are not crucial to the primary scope of the committee
but will still be briefly discussed. Research on these protocols is recommended, as a
unanimous signature has not been reached by the 196 member states on these Protocols.
Modern Issues with the Geneva Codes: The breadth of the Geneva Codes is quite large and covers the legalities of a just
war, the definitions of self-defense, and the treatment of Prisoners of War. However, the
document has not followed the modern age of technological advancement nor did it
expect the ethical dilemma and modern combat brought about by the infamous and tragic
Al-Qaeda attacks on the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. Traditionally war had
been defined as a “conflict between two parties” but the United States dealt with a
fundamentally frightening fact that Al-Qaeda could not be considered a party with
solidity, as it was a fluid organization unaffiliated with any government. It is a dilemma
comparable to two men in a matching box sparring while one has his eyes blind-folded.
Until operatives found the general location of Al-Qaeda quarters, this was very much the
case. In International Humanitarian Law discussions, this meant the United States was
facing an entirely new enemy, and it stimulated the asking of questions, “Are terrorists
entitled to the same rights given to signers of the Geneva Codes?” This was only the
first question. Then in January 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, announced
the opening of a detention center for suspected conspirators and those of Al-Qaeda and
otherwise that would be detained for information. After investigations and study done by
the Department of Justice, the possibility that Guantanamo transgresses IHR and
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 13
constitutionality was very apparent. Guantanamo Bay had received public outcry around
the world as being ignorantly negligent of Geneva Codes, specifically Article 3, which
I will attach below. As humans, should terrorists or those suspected of terrorism be
given Prisoner of War status (POW)? The final ethical and legal question provoked by
the 9/11 attacks regards the usage of drone strikes in the battlefield or as a means to
combat terrorism in other countries. Although, the United States has been the only
country to consistently use drones to attack and target specific people in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, as well as other countries, a handful of sovereign states also
have the weapon. As Owen Bowcott from “theguardian” puts it, “Drone Strikes threaten
50 years of international law”5, meaning that drones provide an unexpected problem that
international law did not expect.
Article 3 of Geneva Convention (III): “ARTICLE 3 In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the
territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed
forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel
treatment and torture;
5 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/21/drone-‐strikes-‐international-‐law-‐un
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 14
(b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading
treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red
Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means
of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention. The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.”
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 15
Discussion Questions ● What infringements of the Geneva Convention codes today must be addressed?
Are there articles that mention solutions to these infringements?
● Can an entire Geneva Conventions code of IHR with all its protocols be verified
and ratified by all member states of the United Nations? If so, how?
● Which articles of the Geneva Convention must be amended/re-written, which
articles must be added, and if need be, what sections must be deleted?
● Should the international body construct an entirely new guideline? What will be
on that new guideline?
● The Geneva Conventions, like many international covenants, lacks enforcement.
How can the codes attain a strong enforcement?
South Jersey Model United Nations 2015
Page 16
Works Cited http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Second https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=375 http://www.cfr.org/human-rights/geneva-conventions/p8778 http://uspolitics.about.com/od/antiterrorism/i/geneva_conv.htm http://www.heritage.org/research/projects/enemy-detention/armed-conflict-and-the-geneva-conventions https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jpf6.htm http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3640104_IHL_SummaryGenevaConv.pdf https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/statement/geneva-conventions-statement-090709.htm https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/faq/terrorism-faq-050504.htm https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/5xfp5a.htm