War - The Geneva Conventions

[BLUEHAWK]

"THE GENEVA CONVENTION - AUGUST 1949"
By: Michael S. "Bluehawk" Bell


The horror and necessity of warfare have been unstoppable since human records of civilization have existed and recorded them. Yet, many have tried to circumscribe war as it is practised by official military personnel over the centuries. Sun Tzu suggested putting limits on war conduct as early as 600 BCE (Before Christian Era). The Hindu "Code of Manu" established the concept of war crimes in about 200 BCE. In 1305 AD, the Scot Sir William Wallace was tried for wartime murder of civilians, though some hold him a sacred hero. In 1625 Grotius wrote a treatise on the humanitarian treatment of civilians during war, titled "On The Law Of War And Peace." Official Confederate tolerance of the outrages at Andersonville subjected Henry Wirtz to the ultimate penalty for "his" crimes. But, it has only been since the mid-1800s that a crescendo of urging constraint upon warring parties boiled up, and only in the 20th century was an international body created solely to look after these decisive matters.

Today, we hear and read of something commonly called "The Geneva Convention", as if it were one document known to all as such. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Inspired by Henri Dunant, founder of the Red Cross, the very first Geneva Convention finding was drawn up in the year 1864. Then and ever since, the Red Cross has played the major role in further treaties of similar aim among nations including one in 1899 covering asphyxiating gases and expanding bullets, 13 treaties in 1907, the "Geneva Gas Protocol" in 1925 (prohibiting bacteriological warfare and poison gas), the two 1929 Geneva Conventions involving treatment of wounded and POW and, in August 1949 there followed 4 Geneva Conventions extending protection to the shipwrecked at sea and civilians. WWll yielded the Nuremberg Trials of which actual proceedings and results are well worth noting in full as to intent and as to true, or even equitable, consequences for the miscreants; saying nothing of how Imperial Japanese forces were held responsible for their atrocities later on. In the hearts of some, even the Red Cross has crossed boundaries of prudence since its founding.

The Hague Convention concerning protection of cultural property was signed in 1954, and in 1977 a United Nations Convention dealt with environmental techniques of warfare which, together with two added protocols to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, extended protection to civil wars.

In short, there does NOT exist a single "Geneva Convention." There is no one document to which all nations have agreed, and no single law which governs warfare. At very best, "The Geneva Convention" as it is errantly albeit commonly understood, is the product of hundreds of years wherein people wishing to reduce or to control the horror of wars have attempted to define, describe and place limits upon the most extreme form of human behavior. It is not an "international" agreement which MUST be followed by anyone. The Conventions are a very very lengthy set of understandings and perceptions which, evidently, have minimal to no effect upon criminal murderous misconduct. To urge otherwise would be to suggest that a people could or should not, of their own moral volition, engage in all but the most criminal of misdeeds in time of unavoidable physical conflict.

As is generally perceived in 2005 AD, "The Geneva Convention" of August 1949 entails exactly 47 pages of 8x10 typing paper, single-spaced. It was agreed to by the Plenipotentaires of all Governments represented at the Diplomatic Conference held at Geneva (Switzerland) from April 21 to August 12, 1949, for the purpose of protecting civilian persons in time of war. In the light of all that has transpired in warfare since then, your author leaves it to the imagination of his readers to determine how effective the treaties have been in accomplishing their stated purpose; however noble and pacifistic the intent. Suffice to say, upon close and full reading, there is NO element of the consequences of war which is not covered by the texts; and there are many elements of war which are reserved to national military forces who must do the fighting in situ, which are in NO way covered nor resolved in practicality when the lead hits the head. Rare few of veteran combat personnel will express the least eagerness to return to that degree of daily brutality.

The United Nations, whom so many decry, have issued the following specific agreements apropos of this topic:
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
- Optional Protocol to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
- Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- Convention against Torture
- Convention against Genocide
- Convention on the Rights of the Child
- Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
- Charter of the United Nations

In this year, 2005, it is estimated that 1/3rd of our planet is under routine constant attack by radical religious fundamentalist suicidal sadistics, who have sent their parasitic sychophants to maim, kill, damage and injure others among world people for not fewer years than the past half-century. Their partisans cyclically offer more of the same to come. Eighteen of them are known to be personally responsible for murdering in excess of 3000 Americans and guests on September 11, 2001. Yet, they wore no uniform, they had no sewn badges upon a shoulder or hat, they carried no flag into battle, and they cowardly refuse to face America or our few allies upon an honorable field of battle. Abu Ghraib and Gitmo are inevitable consequences, not symptoms of, failure to abide by "The Geneva Convention."... a treaty which humanity is not even close to understanding. And neither of those compare remotely to the catastrophic outrages of Nazi death camps, or the excesses of Idi Amin and Pol Pot.

The "Geneva Convention" as it was, is or will be is wishful thinking... in August 1949, and now. Still though, the many conventions of Geneva or anywhere and anyone else have, at their very best, codified that which might, one day, put an end to war solely by virtue of defining its factual results.

Many times has been said words to the effect of, "History is written for the benefit of the victors."
In war there are, most assuredly, victors. Hard men fight terrible battles, not for the nations who sent them, but rather for the preservation of those they fight beside until the war is declared done. And in their honor, not ours, we build and weep with humility at their memorials and graves forever.

Whether homo sapien is or is not actually CAPABLE of ending or even slightly controlling war is a matter for those expert in social engineering and Darwinian theory to posit. Ultimately, "The Geneva Convention" is, thusfar, little more than a very VERY large amalgamation (akin to American IRS regulations) of unrealistic good intentions.

Perhaps it is time, at long last, to take the "Geneva Conventions" seriously?