Showing posts with label Geneva Conventions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geneva Conventions. Show all posts

Saturday, June 22, 2013

Dirty Wars and Extrajudicial Execution (So 1984!)

[Part of the series: 2013 = 1984?]


Yesterday was a busy day.

In the morning, I was writing about how 1984 doesn't seem like fiction anymore. In the evening, I was watching Jeremy Scahill's chilling new film about U.S. special operations worldwide, Dirty Wars.

"The thing that he was about to do was to open a diary. This was not illegal (nothing was illegal, since there were no longer any laws), but if detected it was reasonably certain that it would be punished by death, or at least by twenty-five years in a forced-labor camp." (1984, p. 6)

In 1984, nothing is "illegal" -- there are no laws -- but violations are punishable by death.


Welcome to the U.S.A., 2013.

Dirty Wars focuses on thousands of night raids and other "kill list" operations conducted by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), and in particular the assassination of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son.

I've written repeatedly about the U.S. practice of extrajudicial execution:

VAU Afgh 101: Extrajudicial Executions
Eric Through the Looking Glass
Drones and Zero Accountability Government
Obama Nobel Peace Prize - REVOKED!

It's chilling to see how clearly the practices of 2013 America were foretold by George Orwell, writing in 1949. Here are a few excerpts from 1984 . . . .

"It was always at night -- the arrests invariably happened at night. The sudden jerk out of sleep, the rough hand shaking your shoulder, the lights glaring in your eyes, the ring of hard faces round the bed. In the vast majority of cases there was no trial, no report of arrest. People simply disappeared . . . . your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: 'vaporized' was the word." (p. 17)


"More commonly, people who had incurred the displeasure of the Party simply disappeared and were never heard of again." (p. 39)

" . . . what was likeliest of all -- the thing had simply happened because purges and vaporizations were a necessary part of the mechanics of government. The only real clue lay in the words 'refs unpersons,' which indicated that Withers was already dead." (p. 40)


"One of these days, thought Winston with sudden deep conviction, Syme will be vaporized. He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly. The Party does not like such people. One day he will disappear. It is written in his face." (p. 47)


"And in the general hardening of outlook that set in ... practices which had been long abandoned, in some cases for hundreds of years -- imprisonment without trial, the use of war prisoners as slaves, public executions, torture to extract confessions, the use of hostages and the deportation of whole populations -- not only became common again, but were tolerated and even defended by people who considered themselves enlightened and progressive." (p. 182)

The impossibly upside-down world described by George Orwell actually turns out to be -- point by point -- the world we now live in.

But don't take it from me. Read 1984. See Dirty Wars. Decide for yourself.

(Page references are to the 2009 Plume paperback edition.)

Related posts

 A September 5, 2013, U.S. drone strike in Pakistan killed six people - including Sangeen Zadran -- a "senior militant commander" who was "implicated in a long-running kidnapping drama involving an American soldier."

(See September 5 in Pakistan: Another Day, Another Drone Killing)






A new U.N. report makes it clear that the U.S. has to report fully on all its drone attacks.

(See 2014: The Year of Transparency (for U.S. Drone Use)?)








The U.S. government and its military talk constantly about the new world of "asymmetric warfare" -- which basically boils down to how "unfair" it seems to them that individuals can wield any meaningful amount of power, given how minuscule their numbers or the firepower available to them. But what what we should spend much more time focusing on is "asymmetric policing" -- i.e. the overwhelming power that the U.S. state wields in every encounter with individuals.

(See Too Much State Power? (Asymmetric Warfare and Asymmetric Policing))

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

VAU Afgh 101: Geneva Convention Obligations

This is part of a series of eight "virtual teachins" on U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

The crime of Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.


The U.S. Army * Marine Corps
Counterinsurgency Field Manual


Here, we will look at the specific legal basis for charging perpetrators as war criminals for Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare, and list sources reporting relevant U.S. actions in Afghanistan.

Viewers of this page are strongly encouraged to contribute comments and additional sources in the comments section!

If the American public knew the nature of the crimes that its government was committing in Afghanistan, could it possibly sit still and not force an end to the war, and the removal of U.S. military, intelligence, and contractors from Afghanistan?

LEGAL BASIS
The crime of Failure of Commanding Officers to Ensure That Subordinates Understand Geneva Convention Obligations Regarding the Conduct of Warfare is described on the website for Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

I recently re-read Mike Haas' book. What struck me was that the Bush Administration adopted a policy of saying, in essence, "we don't think the existing rules of war should apply anymore, and we expect that view to be ratified in American law, and we're going to just go ahead based on that expectation." In other words, they openly proceeded in a course that led to crimes of many kinds, without apology, because they thought they would be affirmed in their behavior.

One consequence has been that, unfortunately, although the United States has not changed its legal adherence to the Geneva Conventions and other laws governing war, something just as bad has happened. We have failed to prosecute the crimes that have been committed. In effect, we have affirmed by acquiescence that we accept the Bush position that the old laws no longer apply.

I hasten to add that this has all continued -- and accelerated -- under the Obama administration!

A second consequence has been that leaders and commanders failed to inform those under their command of their obligations under the Geneva Conventions. How could it be otherwise? Having asserted to the American people that the Geneva Conventions don't apply, what sense would it make to make an effort to inform the troops of their Geneva Conventions obligations?

Both of these consequences place us -- you and me -- in grave moral peril, and the two consequences are deeply entwined.

REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld issued a memo to combatant commanders that told them that Geneva Convention obligations with respect to prisoners did not exist in Afghanistan:

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld determines that Al Qaida and Taliban detainees "are not entitled to prisoner of war status for purposes of the Geneva Conventions of 1949." However, detained individuals are to be treated "humanely, and to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of the Geneva Conventions of 1949." (Source: Jan 19, 2002 - Secretary of Defense Memo for Combatant Commanders, "Status of Taliban and Al Qaida".)

(The whole chain of related memos is available on The National Security Archive's webpage "The Interrogation Documents: Debating U.S. Policy and Methods.")

Readers are invited to see for themselves how this has trickled down into a very confused statement of Geneva Convention obligations in the U.S. military's Counterinsurgency Field Manual (2010). To be more specific, the part of the statement we can see is confused; significant portions of the statement (p. D-4 and D-5, the section on Detention and Interrogation) are not even available in the public preview on Google Books.

A specific example of "failure to inform" is provided in an account of U.S. DOD detention centers in Afghanistan by Scott Horton: "Facility rules and relevant Geneva Conventions rules/rights [are] not posted."

(Please supply additional specific examples in the comments section below!)

**********************************************************

Return to the main VAU Afghanistan 101 page.

Photo Credit: Bibliovault

**********************************************************


Related posts

Virtual Antiwar University (VAU) 101 focuses on eight categories of U.S. war crimes, selected from Mike Haas' book, George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes.

(See VAU Afghanistan 101: US War Crimes )













Eric Holder addressed a group of Northwestern Law students and others. Afterward one audience member summed up the speech as he left: "He pretty much said he can kill anyone he wants." The details of that speech will turn you more topsy-turvy than anything Alice experienced when she ventured through the looking glass.

(See Eric Through the Looking Glass)