What's Fair In War?

It seems weirdly priggish to discuss the brutalities of war and the technicalities of law in the same breath. But it was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has heretofore made no secret of his impatience with legalisms, who launched this salvo last week: "It's a violation of the Geneva Convention," he angrily told CNN, "[for Iraqi TV] to be showing prisoners of war in a humiliating manner." Rumsfeld was reacting to news that al-Jazeera network had broadcast Iraqi TV images of bruised, terrified American prisoners of war being questioned by Iraqi reporters. Opponents of the war responded that the U.S. had consistently belittled the Geneva Conventions with its gloves-off handling of suspects detained in the war on terrorism. The implication was that American POWs could expect no better.

So what exactly are the Geneva Conventions, and who is really abusing them? A collection of four agreements on how to fight honorably, the conventions were drawn up in Geneva in 1949, partly in response to World War II atrocities. Today they are widely accepted by the international community, including the U.S., which ratified them in 1955, and Iraq, which agreed to them in 1956. The 85,000-word conventions spell out rules for the ethical treatment of wounded and ill soldiers and sailors at battle (the first and second conventions), POWs (the third, which Rumsfeld invoked) and civilians (the fourth). The basic idea behind all four is that those in wartime who cannot or do not pick up a weapon must be treated with humanity. Not only do the combatants have an obligation not to hurt civilians, POWs and wounded fighters, but in many cases, they must also offer assistance. That may sound moistly idealistic as open combat rages in Iraq, but the conventions do have consequences: in recent years Rwandan and Yugoslav leaders have been imprisoned for wartime transgressions of the Geneva Conventions and related international laws.

Gulf War II has already seen some textbook Geneva infractions, if reports from the front are true: Iraqi fighters who reportedly quartered in a hospital were breaking Annex I of the first convention, which prohibits military activity in medical facilities. Those Iraqis who have allegedly waved white cloths and then started shooting at unwitting G.I.s are committing what the Geneva agreements quaintly call "perfidy," as are any who have tried disguising themselves as civilians. Iraqi officials accuse the U.S. of war crimes too--namely dropping bombs on civilians (a Geneva infringement only if intentional). It's hard to take such claims seriously when they come from a regime that has so enthusiastically defied Geneva for years: gassing civilian Kurds and torturing American and Iranian POWs in previous wars are just two examples.

1. Cheerleading's Risky Lack of Rules
2. British Spies: Licensed to be Gay
3. The Great American Yard Sale
4. Obama Sharpens the Message
5. Apple: Battery Problem Caused iPod Overheating
6. A Glossary of Incompetence
7. Spray-On Condoms: Still a Hard Sell
8. Why Musharraf Failed
9. Wounded NATO Grapples with Russia
10. Making an Arguement for Misspelling