Challenge to pro-Libya-invasion “Left”

Humanitarian interference relaunches 
arms race, lengthens endless wars

From Jean Bricmont interview

Editing by Carolyn Bennett

The humanitarian reasons invoked by the United States 
[in 1999] left me puzzled.

I was also shocked by lack of opposition from the left —

even some of the extreme left —

to this aggression

[Jean Bricmont, author of Humanitarian Imperialism:

Using Human Rights to Sell War]

In an interview this month with Grégoire Lalieu, Jean Bricmont speaks of and to the political Left. In review and as overview to the present Libyan context, he says, “[Humanitarian imperialism] is an ideology that aims to justify military interference against sovereign countries in the name of democracy and Human Rights. 

“The motive is always the same: a population is the victim of a dictator, so we must act. Then all the usual references are trotted out: the Second World War, the war with Spain, and so on. The aim [is] to sell the argument that an armed intervention is necessary. This is what happened in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan.”

Libya — Necessary intervention 

or bad judgment

“This campaign ushers in the reign of the arbitrary,” Bricmont says, [and] “the Libyan conflict is not exceptional.

“There are many other conflicts anywhere in the world whether it may be in Gaza, in Bahrain, or in the Congo, which happened some years ago.” The last of these three “occurred within a context of foreign aggression on the part of Rwanda and Burundi. The enforcement of international law would have saved millions of lives — but it [did not happen] …

“If we apply the underlying principles of interference behind the aggression against Libya, it means that anyone can intervene anywhere they want to. Imagine the Russians intervening in Bahrain or the Chinese in Yemen: the world would be a general and ongoing war.

“Therefore, one major feature of the right to interfere is infringement of standard international law. If we had to change international law to new laws justifying the right to interfere — it would result in a war of all against all.  This is an argument to which the advocates of the right to interfere never give an answer.

“…Such interventions strengthen what I call the ‘barricade effect’: all the countries in the sights of the United States will start to feel threatened and will seek to increase their armaments. We all remember what happened with Iraq President Saddam Hussein

“Moreover, Libya President Muammar al-] Qaddafi had said to the Arab League: ‘We have just lost a member state of the league and none of you have done anything; it can happen to you, too, because even though you are all U.S. allies, so was Saddam in the past.’

“Now the same thing is repeating itself with [Colonel] Qaddafi and the threat which hangs over many states is likely to relaunch the arms race.

“Russia, which is not an unarmed country, has already announced that it would reinforce its troops, but it can go even further. If Libya had the nuclear weapon, it would have never been attacked. This is why North Korea is untouchable.

“Therefore, the left that supports intervention in Libya 

should definitely realize that

humanitarian interference is 

inevitably going to relaunch the 

arms race and lead to long-term wars.”

Sources and notes

“Libya in face of humanitarian imperialism,” An interview (Grégoire Lalieu) with Jean Bricmont, April 19, 2011, Translated from the French by Sheila Carby for Investig’Action - Source: www.michelcollon.info, http://merryabla64.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/libya-in-face-of-humanitarian-imperialism-an-interview-with-jean-bricmont/ 

Jean Bricmont is author of Humanitarian Imperialism: Using Human Rights to Sell War (published in English in 2006, published in 2005: Impérialisme humanitaire. In the book, Humanitarian Imperialism, Jean Bricmont denounces the use of the human rights pretext to justify attacks against countries in the South. He is a pacifist and a committed intellectual.

Bricmont co-authored with Alan Sokal Fashionable Nonsense (also known as Intellectual Impostures) in which they criticize relativism in the philosophy of science. Jean Bricmont also collaborates with Noam Chomsky and campaigns on a variety of progressive causes. He is a member of the Division of Sciences of the Royal Academy for Sciences, Letters and Arts of Belgium. In 2007, he wrote an article in French discussing the possibility of a U.S. invasion of Iran.

Jean Bricmont is a Belgian theoretical physicist, philosopher of science and a professor at the Université catholique de Louvain. He works on renormalization group and nonlinear differential equations, 

http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/jeanbricmont

http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/users/all

http://www.zcommunications.org/humanitarian-imperialism-by-jean-bricmont-1

Is this the final word, as Bricmont puts it — “Unable to assume a coherent attitude against wars, the left is compelled to tag along behind the interventionist policy.”

______________________________

Bennett's books available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; The Book Den, Ltd.: BookDenLtd@frontiernet.net [Danville, NY]; Talking Leaves Books-Elmwood: talking.leaves.elmwood@gmail.com [Buffalo, NY]; Book House of Stuyvesant Plaza: http://www.bhny.com/ [Albany, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY]; LONGS’ Cards and Books: http://longscardsandbooks.com/ [Penn Yan, NY]
______________________________

U.S. /UK “Dirty War” further unveiled

“Dirty War” by definition breaches law, convention, “is a public health and humanitarian problem.”  Reports repeatedly document Dirty War crimes and criminals. Yet the world, poignantly “the righteous” seem purposely powerless to stop and are therefore accomplices in the massacre of innocents.

Re-reporting, editing, comment by Carolyn Bennett

Nevertheless, another report has just been released documenting the callous killing of innocents including the categories of killers and the how and where of massacre. Dr. Madelyn Hsiao-Rei Hicks and her colleagues have published a “Dirty War Index” detailing violent deaths of Iraqi civilians during five years (2003-2008) of U.S. /UK war against the people of Iraq.

Their findings show that of 92,614 civilian deaths (documented by NGO Iraq Body Count), “unknown perpetrators” caused 74 percent (n = 68,396), of civilian deaths, [U.S./UK-led “coalition [uniformed] forces” caused 12 percent (n = 11,516), and “anti-coalition forces” [un-uniformed combatants identified by attacks on coalition targets] caused 11 percent (n = 9,954) of civilian deaths.

Researchers recount: that since the Iraq war began on March 20, 2003 — when a multilateral force led by United States and United Kingdom invaded Iraq — more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians (women, children, noncombatants, and police carrying out non-paramilitary duties) have died because of armed violence, according to the Iraq Body Count. Referenced regularly on Today’s Insight News, IBC is a nongovernmental project collating media reports of deaths of individual Iraqi civilians and crosschecking the reports with data from hospitals, morgues, nongovernmental organizations, and official figures.

In their analysis in a “Dirty War Index” indicating the scale of indiscriminate killing in conflict, the researchers found —

The most indiscriminate effects on women and children in Iraq were from unknown perpetrators firing mortars (Dirty War Index = 79) and non-suicide vehicle bombs (Dirty War Index = 54), and from coalition air attacks (Dirty War Index = 69). 

Coalition forces had a higher Dirty War Index than anti-coalition forces for all weapons combined,” the researchers said, “with no decrease over the study period,” 2003-2008. 

Deaths caused by Coalition forces of Iraqi civilians, women, and children peaked during the invasion period, with relatively indiscriminate effects from aerial weapons. 

Unknown perpetrators causing most Iraqi civilian violent deaths (2003–2008) did so  “primarily through extrajudicial executions that disproportionately increased in regions with greater numbers of violent deaths. 

Unknown perpetrators using suicide bombs, vehicle bombs, and mortars had highly lethal and indiscriminate effects on targeted Iraqi civilians. Indistinguishable from their victims, they were responsible for three-quarters of civilian deaths 

Unknown perpetrator suicide bombings that targeted civilians and coalition aerial bombings killed most civilians per lethal event. The highest average number of civilians killed per event in which a civilian died were in Unknown perpetrator suicide bombings targeting civilians (19 per lethal event) and Coalition aerial bombings (17 per lethal event) 

Extra-judicial executions by unknown perpetrators were responsible for one-third of civilian deaths and disproportionately increased as deaths from other forms of violence increased across Iraq.

In laying out grounds for the content and focus of their study, the researchers said, “Detailed analysis of civilian deaths during wars is important because it can improve the understanding of the impact of these deaths on general public health and on vulnerable subgroups in the population.” Data collected on the nature and effects of violence can guide the development of preventive policies.

An analysis revealing “that air attacks by invading troops cause a high proportion of civilian deaths might encourage policy changes that prohibit air attacks on populated areas.”

An analysis of civilian deaths, which links violent deaths to perpetrators “can provide an indicator of combatants; compliance with the laws of war, which require the protection of civilians from targeted or indiscriminate harm.”

There are laws of war, international humanitarian laws and customary standards, governing the treatment of civilians and combatants (e.g., the Geneva Conventions). Moreover, it is well known among human beings that the death of civilians through armed violence — despite internationally agreed humanitarian standards regarding the treatment of civilians during wars — causes catastrophes for human beings (health and humanitarian problems, cultural and interpersonal, state and environmental problems) that, as Ann Jones writes, continues long after officials have signed papers purporting to end a war or decrease "combatants."

Sources and notes

PLoS Medicine: “Violent Deaths of Iraqi Civilians, 2003–2008: Analysis by Perpetrator, Weapon, Time, and Location,” http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000415

Dr Madelyn Hsiao-Rei Hicks (MD MA MRCPsych) is an honorary lecturer in Health Service and Population Research departments at King’s College London and is a cross-cultural psychiatrist with a background in medical anthropology. “Her research interests focus on sociocultural and epidemiological aspects of violence, depression, suicidality and help-seeking.” A native of the United States, she is an expatriate in Britain and has studied and worked in both countries.

Publications include Li Z, Hicks MH. (2010) The CES-D in Chinese American women: construct validity, diagnostic validity for major depression, and cultural response bias. Psychiatry Research, 175: 227-232; Hicks MH, Dardagan H, Guerrero Serdán G, Bagnall PM, Sloboda JA, Spagat M. (2009) ’The Weapons That Kill Civilians — Deaths of Children and Noncombatants in Iraq, 2003-2008’. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(16): 1585-1588. This article is freely accessible at http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/360/16/1585; Cameron E, Spagat M, Hicks MH. (2009) Tracking Civilian Casualties in Combat Zones using Civilian Battle Damage Assessment Ratios. British Army Review, 147: 87-93; Hicks MH, Spagat M. (2008) ’The Dirty War Index: A public health and human rights tool for examining and monitoring armed conflict outcomes’. PLoS Medicine, 5(12): e243, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050243. This article is freely accessible at http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050243; Rubio-Stipec M, Canino I, Hicks MH & Tsuang M. (2008) ‘Ethnic, Cultural, & Socioeconomic Factors Influencing the Selection, Use and Interpretation of Measures’. In Handbook of Psychiatric Measures, 2nd Edition. Rush AJ, First MB & Blacker D (Eds). American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.: Washington DC. pp 23-32; Hicks MH. (2007) Mortality in Iraq. Lancet, 369: 101-102; Hicks MH. (2006) ’Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: Were valid and ethical field methods used in this survey?’ This working paper is posted as HiCN Research Design Note 3 on the Conflict Research Design Platform page of the Households in Conflict Network website: http://www.hicn.org/research_design.html

Institute of Psychiatry-Maudsley King's College London, University of London, http://www.iop.kcl.ac.uk/staff/profile/?go=11023

[LONDON]:  “More than 92,600 civilians were killed in armed violence in Iraq from 2003 to 2008 — U.S.-led coalition forces showed higher rates of indiscriminate killing of women and children than insurgents, a study has found,” February 16, 2011, http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/16/civilian-death-study-rates%e2%80%9ddirty-war%e2%80%9d-in-iraq.html

“Analysis of Violent Deaths of Iraqi Civilians Between 2003-2008” Science Daily (February 15, 2011) — A paper published in this week's issue of PLoS Medicine provides the most detailed assessment thus far of civilian deaths in the course of the recent Iraq war. Madelyn Hsiao-Rei Hicks from King's College London, UK and colleagues analyzed data from Iraq Body Count (IBC), a nongovernmental project that collates media reports of deaths of individual Iraqi civilians and crosschecks these reports with data from hospitals, morgues, nongovernmental organizations, and official figures. Story Source: The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Public Library of Science, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Since the start of the war against Iraq on March 20, 2003, Iraq Body Count (IBC), a nongovernmental organization, has systematically collated a wide range of war data as a means of monitoring and documenting Iraqi civilian casualties from armed violence. The resulting database interlinks specific violent events with their perpetrators, the weapons used, the individual civilians killed, and the victim’s demographic characteristics, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

The Iraq war has involved both conventional state-to-state warfare and asymmetric, irregular warfare, with continuous international media coverage that has resulted in detailed reports on thousands of events causing civilian death.

Updated figures as of February 16, 2011, Iraq Body Count— Documented civilian deaths from violence: 99,711 – 108,864 

The War is not over when it’s over: women speak out from the ruins of war, Ann Jones (Metropolitan Books, 2010)

________________________________________


Bennett's books available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; The Book Den, Ltd.: BookDenLtd@frontiernet.net [Danville, NY]; Talking Leaves Books-Elmwood: talking.leaves.elmwood@gmail.com [Buffalo, NY]; Book House of Stuyvesant Plaza: http://www.bhny.com/ [Albany, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY]; LONGS’ Cards and Books: http://longscardsandbooks.com/ [Penn Yan, NY]
________________________________________

Restrain State aggression — Why Geneva Conventions

Compiled and edited by Carolyn Bennett

“The importance of the Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols was reflected in the establishment of war-crimes tribunals for Yugoslavia (1993) and Rwanda (1994) and by the Rome Statute (1998) creating an International Criminal Court.”

Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
Convention (IV)
Geneva, August 12, 1949

This Convention IV establishes an international provision for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Signing plenipotentiaries [persons, especially diplomatic agents invested with full power to transact business] of the Governments represented at the Diplomatic Conference held at Geneva, Switzerland, April 21 to August 12, 1949, agreed [excerpt] …

That the High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.…

Article 2
In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace-time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

(1)
Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat [out of combat: disabled] by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavor to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

Protocol II [excerpt]

Article 3 Non-intervention
1. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.

2. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

Article 13 Protection of the civilian population
1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules shall be observed in all circumstances.

2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.

3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Part, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

Article 17 Prohibition of forced movement of civilians
1. The displacement of the civilian population shall not be ordered for reasons related to the conflict unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand. Should such displacements have to be carried out, all possible measures shall be taken in order that the civilian population may be received under satisfactory conditions of shelter, hygiene, health, safety and nutrition.

2. Civilians shall not be compelled to leave their own territory for reasons connected with the conflict.

Geneva Conventions are a series of international treaties concluded in Geneva between 1864 and 1949 for the purpose of ameliorating the effects of war on soldiers and civilians. Two additional protocols to the 1949 agreement were approved in 1977.

The development of the Geneva Conventions was closely associated with the Red Cross, whose founder, Henri Dunant, initiated international negotiations that produced the Convention for the Amelioration of the Wounded in Time of War in 1864....

The 1864 convention was ratified within three years by all the major European powers as well as by many other states. It was amended and extended by the second Geneva Convention in 1906, and its provisions were applied to maritime warfare through the Hague conventions of 1899 and 1907. The third Geneva Convention, the Convention Relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (1929), required that belligerents treat prisoners of war humanely, furnish information about them, and permit official visits to prison camps by representatives of neutral states.

Because some belligerents in World War II had abused the principles contained in earlier conventions, an International Red Cross conference in Stockholm in 1948 extended and codified the existing provisions.

The conference developed four conventions approved in Geneva, August 12, 1949:

(1) Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field
(2) Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
(3) Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
(4) Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War

More than 180 states have become parties to the 1949 conventions. Approximately 150 states are party to Protocol I. More than 145 states are party to Protocol II, though the United States is not. In addition, more than 50 states have made declarations accepting the competence of international fact-finding commissions to investigate allegations of grave breaches or other serious violations of the conventions or of Protocol I.

Protocol I supplementary to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949

Proclaims to the High Contracting Parties’ earnest wish to see peace prevail among peoples

Recalling that every State has the duty, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations, to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations

Believing it necessary nevertheless to reaffirm and develop the provisions protecting the victims of armed conflicts and to supplement measures intended to reinforce their application,

Expressing their conviction that nothing in this Protocol or in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 can be construed as legitimizing or authorizing any act of aggression or any other use of force inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations,

Reaffirming further that the provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and of this Protocol must be fully applied in all circumstances to all persons who are protected by those instruments, without any adverse distinction based on the nature or origin of the armed conflict or on the causes espoused by or attributed to the Parties to the conflict …

High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for this Protocol in all circumstances.

In cases not covered by this Protocol or by other international agreements, civilians and combatants remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from dictates of public conscience.

This Protocol, which supplements the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 for the protection of war victims, shall apply in the situations referred to in Article 2 common to thoseConventions.


Sources and notes

Final Act of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva, August 12, 1949


Conference convened by the Swiss Federal Council for the purpose of revising the Geneva Convention of July 27, 1929, for the Relief of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field; the tenth Hague Convention of October 18,1907, for the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention of July 6, 1906; the Geneva Convention of July 27, 1929, relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War; and for establishing a Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War—


On the basis of the four Draft Conventions examined and approved by the 17th international Red Cross Conference held at Stockholm, deliberated from April 21 to August 12, 1949, at Geneva


The Conference established the texts of the following Four Conventions

Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field
Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of WarProtocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), June 8, 1977, http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/475-760002?OpenDocumentProtocol

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), June 8, 1977
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/f6c8b9fee14a77fdc125641e0052b079


State Parties to Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949
State Parties Signature Ratification / Accession 1) Reservation / Declaration 2)
Unedited (style of date: day-month-year)

Afghanistan 08.12.1949 26.09.1956
Albania 12.12.1949 27.05.1957 27.05.1957 (text)
Algeria 20.06.1960
Andorra 17.09.1993
Angola 20.09.1984 20.09.1984 (text)
Antigua and Barbuda 06.10.1986
Argentina 08.12.1949 18.09.1956
Armenia 07.06.1993
Australia 04.01.1950. 14.10.1958 14.10.1958 (text)
Austria 12.08.1949 27.08.1953
Azerbaijan 01.06.1993
Bahamas 11.07.1975
Bahrain 30.11.1971
Bangladesh 04.04.1972 20.12.1988 (text)
Barbados 10.09.1968 10.09.1968 (text)
Belarus 12.12.1949 03.08.1954
Belgium 08.12.1949 03.09.1952
Belize 29.06.1984
Benin 14.12.1961
Bhutan 10.01.1991
Bolivia 08.12.1949 10.12.1976
Bosnia-Herzegovina 31.12.1992
Botswana 29.03.1968
Brazil 08.12.1949 29.06.1957
Brunei Darussalam 14.10.1991
Bulgaria 28.12.1949 22.07.1954
Burkina Faso 07.11.1961
Burundi 27.12.1971
Cambodia 08.12.1958
Cameroon 16.09.1963
Canada 08.12.1949 14.05.1965
Cape Verde 11.05.1984
Central African Republic 01.08.1966
Chad 05.08.1970
Chile 12.08.1949 12.10.1950
China 10.12.1949 28.12.1956 28.12.1956 (text)
Colombia 12.08.1949 08.11.1961
Comoros 21.11.1985
Congo (Dem. Rep.) 24.02.1961
Congo 04.02.1967
Cook Islands 07.05.2002
Costa Rica 15.10.1969
Côte d'Ivoire 28.12.1961
Croatia 11.05.1992
Cuba 12.08.1949 15.04.1954
Cyprus 23.05.1962
Czech Republic 05.02.1993
Denmark 12.08.1949 27.06.1951
Djibouti 06.03.1978
Dominican Republic 22.01.1958
Dominica 28.09.1981
Ecuador 12.08.1949 11.08.1954
Egypt 08.12.1949 10.11.1952
El Salvador 08.12.1949 17.06.1953
Equatorial Guinea 24.07.1986
Eritrea 14.08.2000
Estonia 18.01.1993
Ethiopia 08.12.1949 02.10.1969
Fiji 09.08.1971
Finland 08.12.1949 22.02.1955
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 01.09.1993 18.10.1996. (text)
France 08.12.1949 28.06.1951
Gabon 26.02.1965
Gambia 20.10.1966
Georgia 14.09.1993
Germany 03.09.1954 03.12.1954. (text)
Ghana 02.08.1958
Greece 22.12.1949 05.06.1956
Grenada 13.04.1981
Guatemala 12.08.1949 14.05.1952
Guinea-Bissau 21.02.1974 21.02.1974. (text)
Guinea 11.07.1984
Guyana 22.07.1968
Haiti 11.04.1957
Holy See 08.12.1949 22.02.1951
Honduras 31.12.1965
Hungary 08.12.1949 03.08.1954
Iceland 10.08.1965
India 16.12.1949 09.11.1950
Indonesia 30.09.1958
Iran (Islamic Rep.of) 08.12.1949 20.02.1957 20.02.1957 (text)
Iraq 14.02.1956
Ireland 19.12.1949 27.09.1962
Israel 08.12.1949 06.07.1951 08.12.1949 (text)
Italy 08.12.1949 17.12.1951
Jamaica 20.07.1964
Japan 21.04.1953
Jordan 29.05.1951
Kazakhstan 05.05.1992
Kenya 20.09.1966
Kiribati 05.01.1989
Korea (Dem.People's Rep.) 27.08.1957 27.08.1957. (text)
Korea (Republic of) 16.08.1966 16.08.1966. (text)
Kuwait 02.09.1967 02.09.1967. (text)
Kyrgyzstan 18.09.1992
Lao People's Dem.Rep. 29.10.1956
Latvia 24.12.1991
Lebanon 08.12.1949 10.04.1951
Lesotho 20.05.1968
Liberia 29.03.1954
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 22.05.1956
Liechtenstein 12.08.1949 21.09.1950
Lithuania 03.10.1996
Luxembourg 08.12.1949 01.07.1953
Madagascar 18.07.1963
Malawi 05.01.1968
Malaysia 24.08.1962
Maldives 18.06.1991
Mali 24.05.1965
Malta 22.08.1968
Marshall Islands 01.06.2004
Mauritania 30.10.1962
Mauritius 18.08.1970
Mexico 08.12.1949 29.10.1952
Micronesia 19.09.1995
Moldova (Republic of) 24.05.1993
Monaco 12.08.1949 05.07.1950
Mongolia 20.12.1958
Montenegro (Republic of) 02.08.2006
Morocco 26.07.1956
Mozambique 14.03.1983
Myanmar 25.08.1992
Namibia 22.08.1991
Nauru 27.06.2006
Nepal 07.02.1964
Netherlands 08.12.1949 03.08.1954
New Zealand 11.02.1950. 02.05.1959
Nicaragua 12.08.1949 17.12.1953
Nigeria 20.06.1961
Niger 21.04.1964
Norway 12.08.1949 03.08.1951
Oman 31.01.1974
Pakistan 12.08.1949 12.06.1951 12.06.1951. (text)
Palau 25.06.1996
Panama 10.02.1956
Papua New Guinea 26.05.1976
Paraguay 10.12.1949 23.10.1961
Peru 12.08.1949 15.02.1956
Philippines 08.12.1949 06.10.1952
Poland 08.12.1949 26.11.1954
Portugal 11.02.1950. 14.03.1961 14.03.1961. (text)
Qatar 15.10.1975
Romania 10.02.1950. 01.06.1954
Russian Federation 12.12.1949 10.05.1954 12.12.1949 (text)
Rwanda 05.05.1964
Saint Kitts and Nevis 14.02.1986
Saint Lucia 18.09.1981
Saint Vincent Grenadines 01.04.1981
Samoa 23.08.1984
San Marino 29.08.1953
Sao Tome and Principe 21.05.1976
Saudi Arabia 18.05.1963
Senegal 18.05.1963
Serbia (Republic of) 16.10.2001
Seychelles 08.11.1984
Sierra Leone 10.06.1965
Singapore 27.04.1973
Slovakia 02.04.1993
Slovenia 26.03.1992
Solomon Islands 06.07.1981
Somalia 12.07.1962
South Africa 31.03.1952
Spain 08.12.1949 04.08.1952
Sri Lanka 08.12.1949 28.02.1959
Sudan 23.09.1957
Suriname 13.10.1976 13.10.1976. (text)
Swaziland 28.06.1973
Sweden 08.12.1949 28.12.1953
Switzerland 12.08.1949 31.03.1950
Syrian Arab Republic 12.08.1949 02.11.1953
Tajikistan 13.01.1993
Tanzania (United Rep.of) 12.12.1962
Thailand 29.12.1954
Timor-Leste 08.05.2003
Togo 06.01.1962
Tonga 13.04.1978
Trinidad and Tobago 24.09.1963
Tunisia 04.05.1957
Turkey 12.08.1949 10.02.1954
Turkmenistan 10.04.1992
Tuvalu 19.02.1981
Uganda 18.05.1964
Ukraine 12.12.1949 03.08.1954
United Arab Emirates 10.05.1972
United Kingdom 08.12.1949 23.09.1957 23.09.1957. (text)
United States of America 12.08.1949 02.08.1955 02.08.1955. (text)
Uruguay 12.08.1949 05.03.1969 05.03.1969. (text)
Uzbekistan 08.10.1993
Vanuatu 27.10.1982
Venezuela 10.02.1950. 13.02.1956
Viet Nam 28.06.1957 28.06.1957. (text)
Yemen 16.07.1970 25.05.1977. (text)
Zambia 19.10.1966
Zimbabwe 07.03.1983


Ratification
A treaty is generally open for signature for a certain time following the conference which has adopted it. However, a signature is not binding on a State unless it has been endorsed by ratification. The time limits having elapsed, the Conventions and the Protocols are no longer open for signature. The States which have not signed them may at any time accede or, in the appropriate circumstances, succeed to them.


Accession
Instead of signing and then ratifying a treaty, a State may become party to it by the single act called accession.

Reservation / Declaration
Unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State when ratifying, acceding or succeeding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State (provided that such reservations are not incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty).

“ Palestine — June 21, 1989:
The Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs received a letter from the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations Office at Geneva informing the Swiss Federal Council ‘that the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, entrusted with the functions of the Government of the State of Palestine by decision of the Palestine National Council, decided, on May 4,1989, to adhere to the Four Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 and the two Protocols additional thereto.’

September 13, 1989, the Swiss Federal Council informed the States that it was not in a position to decide whether the letter constituted an instrument of accession, ‘due to the uncertainty within the international community as to the existence or non-existence of a State of Palestine.’” Copyright © 2005 International Committee of the Red Cross, International Humanitarian Law - Treaties and Documents, http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/380?OpenDocument
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/360-560001?OpenDocumentBritannica notes




___________________________________________ 

Bennett's books available at New York independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; The Book Den, Ltd.: BookDenLtd@frontiernet.net [Danville, NY] Talking Leaves Books-Elmwood: talking.leaves.elmwood@gmail.com [Buffalo, NY]; Book House of Stuyvesant Plaza: http://www.bhny.com/ [Albany, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY] Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]

300,000 Palestinians’ “harsh reality” ignored ─ ACRI

Edited excerpt, re-reporting by Carolyn Bennett
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel released a report today updating information on human rights violations in Occupied East Jerusalem where, at the end of 2009, approximately 303,400 Palestinians ─ 36 per cent of the city’s 835,500 total population ─ lived.

Israel seized and occupied the West Bank including East Jerusalem in 1967. The international community condemned these actions. The United Nations declared them illegal under international law. Release of the Association for Civil Rights’ report precedes Israel’s scheduled celebrations marking the 43rd anniversary of Israel’s aggression against East Jerusalem.

In the report:

Ninety-five thousand children languish below the poverty line

Less than 50 percent of schoolchildren attend public schools
A thousand classrooms are missing
Dropout rates are at 50 percent

Only three Social Service Stations operate in East Jerusalem (20 in the West)

Eighty homes were demolished in 2009 leaving 300 people with no roof over their heads
The Interior Ministry has escalated revocation of Palestinian Jerusalemites’ residency status

Fifty-km shortage of drainage pipes
Regular sewage overflow creates environmental hazards
Hundreds of streets receive no garbage collection services
Eight post offices operate in East Jerusalem (42 in West Jerusalem)

Community leaders and activists are pressure, harassed
Palestinian NGOs are shut down for undisclosed security reasons

Jerusalem residents suffer long waiting periods at checkpoints
These barriers and humiliations violate commitments made by the State to the High Court of Justice

“This past year East Jerusalem has been on everyone’s agenda, making headlines in Israel and abroad,” The Association for Civil Rights writes. “Unfortunately, despite all this attention, the harsh reality of everyday life of 300,000 Palestinian Jerusalemites remains unknown, ignored by both the authorities and the public.”

Sources and notesDetails and media inquiries to Ronit Sela, ronits@acri.org.il; http://www.acri.org.il/eng/story.aspx?id=722
“Human Rights in East Jerusalem: Facts and Figures 2010”

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel founded in 1972 takes the mandate of ensuring “Israel’s accountability and respect for human rights, by addressing violations committed by the Israeli authorities in Israel, the Occupied Territories, or elsewhere.” ACRI’s work encompasses litigation and legal advocacy, education, and public outreach as the most effective way in which to build toward a long-term vision of a just and democratic society that respects the equal rights of all its members. It holds that “as a fledgling democracy without a constitution and an increasingly segmented and polarized society, Israel needs an organization such as ACRI that is committed to promoting the universality of human rights and defending the rights of all, regardless of religion, nationality, gender, ethnicity, political affiliation, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic background. As an independent and non-partisan organization, ACRI uses this multi-pronged strategy to advance the concept of civil and human rights as an integral part of democratic community building and as a unifying force in Israeli public life.”

Also: “Poverty ‘widespread’ in East Jerusalem,” May 10, 2010, http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/05/201051081849739152.html

Attempted Arrest of war criminal ─ Cronin to Blair in Brussels

Re-reported with comment by Carolyn Bennett

“You are guilty of war crimes”

“A war of aggression”

Military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense

In breach of customary international law

Specifically the Nuremberg Principles under the rubric of

the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court

the legal body exercising jurisdiction over

the crime of aggression

Irish journalist, Citizen David Cronin attempted to arrest former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and escort him to the nearest Brussels police station to be charged formally with these crimes.

If successful and “found to be eligible for the bounty,” Cronin said, “he would prefer that the money go to a Palestinian human rights charity in the Gaza Strip.”

Reports said Blair “momentarily flinched” at the attempted arrest; but a bodyguard “quickly pushed” Cronin away. The former UK prime minister is in Brussels for a hearing on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Belgium and the UK have ratified the Rome Statute but all parties to the text have yet to adopt a definition of the “crime of aggression.” In a review conference to be held later this year, parties to the Statute are expected to come to an agreement on the definition of “crime of aggression.”

“My motivation in trying to arrest Blair,” Cronin told the press, “is entirely based on my contempt for the crimes he [Blair] has committed and abetted in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon and Serbia … Perhaps one million lives were lost in Iraq alone.”

This news item gives pause to consider another living quarter for the dock: Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama.


Sources
“Journalist attempts citizen's arrest of Blair in EU parliament” (Leigh Phillips), EUObserver, March 23, 2010, http://euobserver.com/9/29739
Also March 23, 2010, http://www.rnw.nl/english/radio-program-list/2539