| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| HRW: Feigning Civilian Status Violates the Laws of War |
| 2003-03-31 |
| I know we don't ordinarily cite press releases, but I saw that over at Instapundit and nearly fainted. Human Rights Watch actually is citing Iraq for, for, for human rights violations! As Fred would say, "Quick, Ethel, my pills!" (New York, March 31, 2003) Feigning civilian or noncombatant status to deceive the enemy is a violation of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said today. On March 29 at a U.S. military roadblock near Najaf, an Iraqi noncommissioned officer reportedly posing as a taxi driver detonated a car bomb that killed him and four U.S. soldiers. Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said at a Baghdad news conference that such attacks would become âroutine military policy.â International law prohibits attacking, killing, injuring, capturing or deceiving the enemy by resorting to what is called perfidy. A perfidious attack is one launched by combatants who have led opposing forces to believe that the attackers are really noncombatants. Acts of perfidy include pretending to be a civilian (who cannot be attacked) or feigning surrender (surrendering soldiers also cannot be attacked) so that opposing forces will let down their guard at the moment of attack. Other examples include feigning protective status by the misuse of emblems of the United Nations or the red cross and red crescent. Perfidy poses particular dangers because it blurs the distinction between enemy soldiers, who are a valid target, and civilians and other noncombatants, who are not. Soldiers fearful of perfidious attacks are more likely to fire upon civilians and surrendering soldiers, however unlawfully. Attacks carried out by openly armed belligerents in civilian clothes, with no attempt to feign civilian status, do not constitute perfidy. Suicidal attacks by undisguised military forces, exemplified by Japanese kamikaze attacks during World War II, are not a violation of the laws of war. Perfidy is distinguished from ruses of war, such as mock operations, misinformation, surprises, ambushes, or the use of camouflage or decoy. Ruses are permissible acts of warfare intended to trick the enemy; they do not violate international law to the extent that they do not depend on taking advantage of an enemyâs willingness to abide by the law protecting noncombatants. "Perfidious." Sounds like a word we ought to be using in connection with Sammy more often. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #2 HRW is trying to salvage their reputation. It's too obvious to scream about US "atrocities" while totally and completely ignoring Iraqi atrocities. They'll shift their coverage from 10 to 0, to something like 9 to 1 to feign legitimacy. Don't fall for this. They need to be pushed on other issues. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2003-04-01 07:22:15 |
| #1 At some point, we're going to need to ask for help from the Iraqi people, before Saddam kills them all. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2003-03-31 19:09:20 |