Second Crimean War # 193

Author--

view The Doodler's profile

The Doodler
1st Dec 2011, 10:54 PM

Iaroslav is managing to break the rules of (American) football -- no knee tackles -- and the Geneva Conventions -- faking a surrender -- at the same time.
(Here's the text of the relevant section, if anyone's interested:
"4.' Proviso regarding safeguard: in any of these cases abstaining from hostile acts and not attempting to escape '
1621 A man who is in the power of his adversary may be tempted to resume combat if the occasion arises. (31) Another may be tempted to feign a surrender in order to gain an advantage, which constitutes an act of perfidy. (32) Yet another, who has lost consciousness, may come to and show an intent to resume combat. It is self-evident that in these different situations, and in any other similar situations, the safeguard ceases. Any hostile act gives the adversary the right to take countermeasures until the perpetrator of the hostile act is recognized, or in the circumstances, should be recognized, to be ' hors de combat ' once again. Obviously the remarks made above with regard to Article 35 Database 'IHL - Treaties & Comments', View '1. All treaties \1.2. Articles' ' (Basic Rules), ' paragraph 2, concerning the prohibition of superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, continues to apply in full. The retort should be proportional to the measure of danger. It should not amount to a refusal to give quarter. Whatever the situation, the criterion of having been rendered ' hors de combat ' suffices."

Emphasis mine. I think it would apply to Bohdan's soldiers, too, even though they're not regular soldiers. But I dunno. Regardless. Enjoy the comic.:) )

(Edit) (Delete)

Users--

view Meed's profile

Meed
2nd Dec 2011, 12:22 AM

Geneva convention?

BUHA

What a joke.

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

view The Doodler's profile

The Doodler
2nd Dec 2011, 12:38 AM

I'm a fan, but I dunno if the USSR ever signed on, or if Ukraine did in this timeline. >_>

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

view Ryan C.'s profile

Ryan C.
2nd Dec 2011, 9:41 AM

Does it even apply to non-state military groups?

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

view Tantz Aerine's profile

Tantz Aerine
2nd Dec 2011, 9:59 AM

True, but they did try to execute him while having surrendered which is also a breach of the Geneva Convention, so I doubt they will take him to court. :P

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

view The Doodler's profile

The Doodler
2nd Dec 2011, 5:40 PM

@Ryan C.: Some (most?) provisions do. (Like, it would violate the laws and customs of war to, say, torture a POW whether they were a non-state actor or not. But that's a pretty extreme example.) I'm not quite sure how this specific instance would work, though.
@Tantz Aerine: Well, they held him at gunpoint, but...to be fair, Bohdan's army has been breaking the rules of war right and left, between attacking civilians, using chemical weapons, and whatever they'd do to Yana if they caught her. So yeah, if it ever went to court, Iaroslav would probably get off and they probably wouldn't. :P

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

Joshua Cranmer
17th Jan 2018, 12:31 AM

The Geneva Conventions in practice only really apply to those who can get their butts hauled into court to face charges.

In theory, it's more difficult. The conventions themselves have articles expressly stating that they mostly don't apply in cases of non-international conflicts (although they do note that you should follow them anyways). Protocol 1 doesn't have this text. Instead, it says it applies to the situations that the conventions apply to, and expressly includes a few categories of non-international conflict (e.g., colonial rebellion) that it applies to. There's an argument to be made that the Ukrainian conflict here would not fall under any of those categories, so the Geneva Conventions mostly wouldn't apply.

It's not clear if Iaroslav is committing perfidy. The intent of that article is that people cannot take advantage of situations where the rules of war are not to harm the enemy. In this situation, where it's a single person who's surrendering and has a gun trained on him the entire time, and I don't think Iaroslav ever clearly expressed an intent to surrender. Iaroslav isn't a POW at this point in any case, but if he clearly expressed an intent to surrender, that would make him hors de combat (violation of that is considered a grave breach).

Isn't law fun?

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)

view The Doodler's profile

The Doodler
19th Jan 2018, 9:53 AM

I know I say this a lot, but I have the best readers of all the readers. Thank you!

(Edit) (Delete) (Reply)