Printer-Friendly Version

International Law Treachery
By Fred Gedrich
June 28, 2004

One of the indisputable facts emerging from the War on Terror is that terrorists are purposely and successfully using international law as a tactical weapon against their civilized world enemies. And sadly, their success is being enhanced by the support of witless enablers in this country and elsewhere.

Lawless barbarians like al Qaeda and other terror groups know that their adversaries will fight this global war believing that "the rule of law is what separates the civilized world from the barbarians." And they have shrewdly and callously exploited civilized rules of warfare to their advantage.

While Coalition Forces abide by these rules - and mete out punishment to those among their ranks who don't (like those involved in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal) - the terrorists go about their deadly business dressed in civilian clothes, hiding among the innocent, and operating from mosques, hospitals, and schools, flagrantly violating Geneva conventions and protocols.

The barbarians' weapons of choice are improvised explosive devices, suicide bombing attacks, and video-taped beheadings. They seek to inflict as much mutilation, death, destruction and terror on civilian and military targets as possible.

In the uncivilized world, the terrorists are treated as heroes and, shockingly, in many quarters of the civilized world, including the UN, they are considered "freedom fighters" or insurgents, rather than barbarians.

On the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, hundreds of brave American soldiers have died from their cowardly attacks and several thousand more have lost limbs or suffered other serious injuries. The UN's chief humanitarian, Sergio de Mello, lost his life in a suicide bombing attack in Baghdad. Al Qaeda thugs unmercifully beheaded American civilians Nick Berg and Paul Johnson - and shamefully waved their heads before a global audience. These barbarians have been on a killing orgy for nearly three decades.

However, if Coalition Forces dare attack these barbarians in their sanctuaries, they quickly respond by claiming the attacks are against civilian populations and religious, educational and humanitarian institutions. If killed, terrorist comrades claim Coalition Forces have taken the lives of innocent civilians. If captured, they claim they have been denied legal rights as prisoners of war under Geneva conventions and protocols. If questioned by the International Red Cross and Red Crescent, they claim they have been tortured and abused.

One would think these barbaric atrocities and behavior patterns would generate universal support for the war, condemnation of terrorist activity, and swift and appropriate justice for terrorists - but they haven't.

Many global ideologues like UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, anti-war activists like the communist front group ANSWER, left-wing politicians like Senator Ted Kennedy, journalists like Seymour Hersh, newspapers like the New York Times, and human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have all voiced fierce opposition to the conduct of the U.S.-led global War on Terror - and hysterical and overdone coverage of the reprehensible Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

Their public pronouncements give the impression that the real war criminals reside in the United States and other countries allied with it. Alternatively, some of them have called for giving many suspected captured terrorists Geneva Convention protections, freedom, and even releasing the mass murderer Saddam Hussein.

In reality, the Geneva conventions and protocols of 1949 and 1977 are the civilized world's most recent attempt to control wartime behavior. These rules established, among other things, laws governing the conduct of soldiers and the treatment of prisoners and civilians during conflict.

At the heart of the conventions and protocols are clear distinctions between warring parties (combatants) and civilians (non-combatants). Their chief benefits are to make it easier for combatants to avoid targeting non-combatants and for lawful combatants (soldiers) from being prosecuted for acts of war. To qualify as a lawful combatant under Article IV of the Geneva Convention a soldier must (1) be commanded for a person responsible for subordinates, (2) have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (a uniform), (3) carry arms openly, and (4) conduct operations in accordance with laws and customs of war.

Conversely, an unlawful combatant is a fighter who does not play by the accepted rules of war - and is not entitled to Geneva Convention protections - and it is precisely the type of enemy the civilized world faces in the global War on Terror.

Misguided zealots seemingly use international law to further selfish political agendas. By misdirecting the vast majority of their criticisms to Coalition Forces fighting terrorism, they actually help the terrorists at the expense of victims and potential victims of terrorism. Their shallow and dangerous elitist worldview clouds their judgment and prevents them from fully recognizing the evil nature of terrorism - and the serious threat it poses to mankind. And it could eventually expose them too, to the butcher's knife.

President George W. Bush is right. This war is unlike any other. It really is a battle between the forces of good and evil - and a battle of nation states against stateless, lawless, and uncivilized enemies. And like Franklin Delano Roosevelt said at the onset of WWII, it must be fought until "absolute victory" is achieved.

-----------

Fred Gedrich is a senior policy analyst at Freedom Alliance and a former official at the U.S. Defense and State Departments.

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.