Thursday, July 21, 2005
BRITISH TROOPS ON TRIAL FOR “WAR CRIMES”?
It is certainly disturbing to hear that British troops are being put on trial for war crimes. But a closer look makes me wonder about whether the term of “war crime” here is really appropriate. Unfortunately I don’t have my standard referral work to hand, so I am not sure what the official definition of a ”war crime” is. Now I would have thought that a war crime would have to be a criminal action, undertaken by a soldier in wartime in following the rules of engagement and/or a direct order from someone further up the chain of command. As far as I can see this applies in this case. However, I am pretty sure that to qualify as a war crime, this criminal behaviour also has to be accepted and not be prosecuted by the state whose soldiers committed the crime. As the Army/MoD/Government is undertaking investigations and imposing punishments this criteria isn’t fulfilled. Surely this means these are simply crimes rather than “war crimes”?
It is certainly disturbing to hear that British troops are being put on trial for war crimes. But a closer look makes me wonder about whether the term of “war crime” here is really appropriate. Unfortunately I don’t have my standard referral work to hand, so I am not sure what the official definition of a ”war crime” is. Now I would have thought that a war crime would have to be a criminal action, undertaken by a soldier in wartime in following the rules of engagement and/or a direct order from someone further up the chain of command. As far as I can see this applies in this case. However, I am pretty sure that to qualify as a war crime, this criminal behaviour also has to be accepted and not be prosecuted by the state whose soldiers committed the crime. As the Army/MoD/Government is undertaking investigations and imposing punishments this criteria isn’t fulfilled. Surely this means these are simply crimes rather than “war crimes”?
