Annotated secondary source – a 2003 linking GCIII to the war on terror (before we knew about Abu Ghraib)

“The Geneva Conventions and Prisoners of War.” Global Policy Forum (2003). 10 Mar. 2008 <http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/general/2003/0324tv.htm>.

 

Rhetorical Situation: This article was published on March 24, 2003 in a global policy forum online.  There is no author listed on the website, so I looked into the general Global Policy Forum as the author.  On the website for the about GPF page it states: “Global Policy Forum monitors policy making at the United Nations, promotes accountability of global decisions, educates and mobilizes for global citizen participation, and advocates on vital issues of international peace and justice.”  Keeping this in mind as the purpose of the website, it can be seen that the purpose of this article is to evaluate the use of media in the treatment of prisoners of war in the conflict in the Middle East.  In the context of when it was written, the implications were not as grand as they are now that Abu Ghraib has happened.  Now it is huge that this was happening in 2003.  It shows how the incident at Abu Ghraib could possibly have been a huge part of demolishing the US’s credibility in the war on terror, though it may not be apparent yet.

 

Looking dazed and fearful, five U.S. soldiers captured by Iraqi forces were shown on videotape broadcast by al-Jazeera on March 23. President Bush warned that if POW’s were not treated humanely, “the people who mistreat the prisoners will be treated as war criminals.” For its part, Iraq said it would respect the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of the prisoners.

  This is so unbelievable to read because this article was written for a Global Policy forum in March 2003, before the Abu Ghraib scandal broke out.  This tackles the issue of the treatment of prisoners of war from the complete opposite angle.  This time the US soldiers are the prisoners and the Iraqis are those in power.  It is crazy to read about Bush using the Geneva Convention as a defense and the Iraqis agreeing to abide by it.  This is the complete opposite situation of the one I have been researching.  I am used to hearing about US soldiers violating the Geneva Convention by torturing and abusing Iraqi prisoners, NOT Iraqi forces abiding by the Geneva Convention when they have US soldiers held captive.

 

Iraqi POW’s are not the only ones who have been filmed or photographed in captivity. U.S. networks have also shown footage of Iraqi soldiers surrendering or being detained during military operations, and several still photographs of POW’s have appeared in U.S. and other news media.

  Here, it is even mentioned that there have been images released of Iraqis under US control, just like how Iraqis often released video footage of frightened American POWs.  It does not mention anything about Abu Ghraib though because that has not happened yet, or at least there is no public knowledge of it yet.

 

According to A.P.V. Rogers, a former Major General in the British army and an expert in the laws of war, the key to deciding whether treatment of POW’s infringes the Convention is to look at the intention of the action. Action that was intended to be “humiliating and degrading,” he said, would qualify as a breach of the Convention. But television footage that was “merely factual” would not necessarily be a violation.

  This makes it clear that the essay is an investigation into whether or not the Iraqis release of video footage of prisoners is violating the Geneva Convention.  This man concludes it is not intending to humiliate or degrade the soldiers, it is merely displaying the fact that these men are under Iraqi control.  Back in March 2003 there was speculation as to whether or not the videos violate the Geneva Convention and there was not even torture being depicted in them.  Two years later the tables have completely turned and the US is under scrutiny because there were videos and pictures explicitly showing intent to humiliate and degrade Iraqis.  This gray line that is being investigated in this essay is what is crossed with the Abu Ghraib images.

 

A spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross, Florian Westphal, told the Crimes of War Project that the ICRC would consider the use of any image “that makes a prisoner of war individually recognisable” to be a violation of Article 13 of the Convention.

  So the US violated Article 13 by having those photographs and videos alone, regardless of whether or not the POWs in the images were being tortured?  May examine this claim more.  Is it valid?  Did anyone take this into consideration or was it ignored because of the nature what was in the images? (anyone being the US government, the army, anyone whose opinion about the scandal or decision about punishment matters)

 

Although the United States says that the Geneva Conventions are not technically applicable to detainees from the war in Afghanistan or the wider campaign against terrorism, the U.S. government has pledged to abide by the main humanitarian provisions of the Convention.

  This is huge!!! After being caught with images of shackle prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, this was the response from the US.  Too bad they did it again in Iraq!  Why are they not technically applicable to detainees from the war in Afghanistan and the war on terror?? Why are they making excuses for this war?  What makes the United States the authority on whether or not the Geneva Convention applies? It always applies because there are always human lives at stake!

 

Technically, not all violations of the Geneva Conventions are “war crimes” – that determination is reserved for serious breaches of the treaty. General Rogers said that in his opinion, subjecting prisoners of war to humiliating or degrading treatment was a serious violation, and hence a war crime.

It has been reported that footage of dead U.S. soldiers, also aired by al-Jazeera, appears to indicate that some may have been shot in the forehead at close range. If the soldiers were executed in captivity, that would be a grave breach of the Geneva Convention, and a war crime.

  This shows how the US is no different from al-Jazeera because it has chosen to make excuses for violating the Geneva Convention.  The US has humiliated, degraded, and killed Iraqi POWs, therefore it has committed a war crime and has become no better than leading Iraqi officials.

Advertisement