As part of the Bush/Allawist campaign to subdue Iraq’s cities, the US military has been turning off the water to many of them. You can imagine what this means for civilian families, hospitals, etc.
It is also a clear breach of the 2nd Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions, which deals with precisely the issue of what is permitted and what not permitted during situations of siege and assault on cities.
Dan O’Huiginn and his colleagues from Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq* have pulled together a very useful briefing paper on this issue. It’s written from a UK perspective– drawing together the info on the denial-of-water issue for British MPs and urging them to act on it. I am sure that it could easily be edited to form an appeal to legislators and authorities in other countries.
Especially the US!
I note parenthetically that while many in the US political establishment argue strongly for respect of the provisions of international humanitarian law that apply to the treatment of prisoners-of-war, or wounded combatants, they generally seem less enthusiastic about arguing for the provisions that are designed to protect civilians living under foreign military occupation.
I’m wondering whether this is because, while there is an implied “reciprocity” in all the Geneva Conventions and annexes, it might be harder for Americans to imagine that their (our) homeland might ever come under foreign military occupation than it is to imagine that US soldiers might be taken prisoner in hostilities?
This failure of imagination notwithstanding, it seems evident to me that basic human ethics, as well as the provisions of international humanitarian law, should be a powerful argument for trying to separate civilians as much as possible from the horrors of war.
Also, as Dan and Co. argue in their briefing paper, it only makes good political sense in the Iraqi context for the US/Allawists to try to treat Iraqi civilians decently…
—
*Sorry I got the full name of CASI wrong in an earlier post.
5 thoughts on ““Bush war” in Iraq: denial of water”
Comments are closed.
How can you comment to babarians?
In one sense, this attitude is more likely to be associated with the great imperial cultures that believed themselves to be the only civilized people in the universe, than with those usually called barbarians. Though of course barbarians can easily be self-centered.
It’s interesting that Reuters have taken that small but fateful step beyond merely selective reporting to intentional deception. In their most recent Fallujah post they say:
‘A Red Crescent convoy reached Falluja on Saturday with the first aid since U.S.-led forces began blasting their way in five days ago, and U.S. and Iraqi officials said only pockets of rebel resistance remained … “Conditions in Falluja are catastrophic,” said Iraqi Red Crescent spokeswoman Firdoos al-Abadi, whose organization says there are severe shortages of food and medicine in the city. Abadi said the Red Crescent’s five trucks and three ambulances had arrived at the main hospital on the western edge of Falluja, some 50 km (30 miles) west of Baghdad.’
(‘Aid Convoy Reaches Falluja, Gunmen Stay in Mosul’ Sat Nov 13, 2004 06:47 PM ET – http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6805061 )
thereby creating the false impression that the aid has reached the inhabitants.
Of course, the main hospital is the first “target” siezed by the American aggressors in their assault on the city*. The last I heard they are not permitting the Red Crescent to distribute the aid they brought.
*When they siezed the hospital, they “arrested” and badly roughed up the doctors and staff, who were, after all, only there to do their jobs of providing medical care to the people of Falluja.
This imperial/criminal arrogance was to expect : Bush has just named Alberto Gonzalez General Attorney. Gonzalez is the expert who declared that the Geneva Conventions were “obsolete”.
The US military bombed two hospitals in Falludjah : the first one at the beginning of the assault, the second, a makeshift hospital some days later. It was probably their way to prevent testimonies concerning civilian deaths. They cut water and electricity and banned food to come in, this is a real siege and will cause many civilian deaths, particularly of children.
Although Reuter’s wires are just phoning the Marines’ version of the assault, you can still learn frightful facts concerning the US strategy, as it is described by the embedded journalists. Before the attacks, the US called for all the citizen to leave the city, but they prevented all young men to leave (15-45, 15-50 or 15-55 years old depending on the accounts). Then yesterday I read that after the main streets were retaken, the US military along with the Iraqis had begun a house to house search and that before entering houses, the marines shoot in the houses.
Now I’ve also read that about 60’000-100’000 people were still in the city. On other accounts, the US evaluated the number of “terrorists” hiding in Falludjah to about 1’000-6’000. Depending on the data, between one out of ten to one out of hundred are a threat to the occupier, but the marines are indiscriminately shooting all the others down, after making sure noone would be able to account for the real number of casualties.
Many houses are completely destroyed. All bear traces of the fights. In their house to house search, they are using Israelian bulldozer’s tactic, digging holes in the walls instead of driving through the steets. This is surely less risky for the Marines’ but won’t leave a house indemn for the Falludjans. The city will be in complete ruins after that. It is a collective punishment. The US is making use of disproportionated force : in order to get at 1’000-6’000 insurgents, they are razing a city of 360’000-500’000 inhabitants. Naturally most of the fighters will have flied away as they come. But they don’t care, they just want to make an example of Falludjah.
All this is clearly breacking the Geneva Conventions. The ICRC has made a public call, remembering the rules the occupier has to respect and asking the US to allow a passage for his aid trucks. Why was the call public ? because after four days, of attempts they were still not getting any answer on the part of the US, allowing their trucks to get through.
Finally on saturday the Red CRescent prepared a convoy containing medical supplies, food, blankets and a water purification unit, took the road for Falludjah and said they would try to negotitate when on the spot. I think they were allowed entry finally, but that was after many days were lost and I don’t know whether they could finally distribute their help or not.
I’m so angry at the American’s misdeeds in Iraq, at their arrogance in the rest of the world. I get the feeling that we don’t share the same values anymore. Bush paid lip service to the creation of a Palestinian state, after he met with Blair, but he delayed it by 2009 and didn’t like the idea of an international conference. I don’t think things will really change for the Palestinian. Bush is still supporting Sharon as ever.