Shattered Cross

I know a lot of fancy dancers,
People who can glide you on a floor,
They move so smooth but have no answers.
When you ask, "Why'd you come here for?"
"I don't know why."
--Hard Headed Woman, Cat Stevens

Don't bring me your tales of temptation and loss
The rags of your dreams
Your shattered cross
I have heard your confession I know who you blame
If you had it all back you'd just lose it again
--Shattered Cross, Darrel Scott
_______________

A meditation on independence:

The Declaration of Independence is a simple, straightforward document, and illuminating when read not swaddled in the flag.

The words translated into action which created the USA, whose birthday we celebrate this weekend. But looked at another way, our Founding fathers were criminals and traitors as they were rebelling against the legally constituted government of the colonies.

These men whom we revere were guerrillas, insurgents and rebels, quite simply. In addition, the document which they penned was not quite so revolutionary when one takes into consideration that most of the ideas had already been stated in places like the 1689 English Bill of rights (Independence, British-Style). Their innovation was to cobble on Rousseau's concept of natural rights.

Fast-Forward to 2009, and this government has forces deployed to over 80 nations around the world. We now fight and kill guerrillas, insurgents and rebels, calling them an evil. It seems our moral yardstick is not so absolute as it once was, or perhaps it never was.

Our War Department has morphed into a Defense Department, which does not live up to the name. Our far-flung troops are not exactly defending the homeland. Running NATO right up to the Russian borders, fighting in AFPAK and shuttering 130,000 troops in Iraq is not exactly "providing for the common defense."

Yet instead of asking, "Why?" the American people get caught up in the war maker's fancy dancing about their "How". We are offensive, in a defensive sort of way, and even the liberal democratic politicians will not extricate us from these quagmires.

We fight wars to keep the Koreans from invading Korea, and to keep the Vietnamese from fighting the Vietnamese. Ditto Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. has bypassed the Prussian model, as the state exists as an instrument of the defense establishment and related industries. The President is relegated to the position of rubber-stamping Department of Defense policy.

The U.S. was born in violence and illegal revolution, yet we now fight to deny others this same option. Nations have the right to determine their own destiny -- this is the basis of the Declaration of Independence.

Times change, but principles are immutable. We hold these truths to be self-evident.

Double Standards

The nation that draws a clear line of demarcation
between its thinking men and its fighting men
will soon have its thinking done by cowards
and its fighting done by fools
--General Sir William Francis Butler

I wish I may, I wish I might,
have the wish, I wish tonight
--Star Light, Star Bright,
Mother Goose Nursery Rhyme
______________

[D-15] . . .Insurgents have no special status under international law. They are not, when captured, prisoners of war. Insurgents may be prosecuted legally as criminals for bearing arms against the government and for other offenses. . . . insurgents are, as a legal matter, criminal suspects within the legal system of the host nation (HN).

[D-16] . . . In the absence of [a Status of Forces Agreement] or some other arrangement with the host nation, DoD personnel in foreign countries may be subject to its laws.

--From "Application of Criminal Laws of the Host Nation," (FM 3-24, Sec. D-4)

_______________

Despite the COIN manual's assertion, in practice, there is no reciprocity. Insurgents are detained as criminal suspects within our jurisdiction, while it is highly unlikely that DoD personnel would be subject to host nation laws.

As there is no Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq or Afghanistan, the legality of the Iraq occupation hinges on a U.N. declaration that the U.S. is a legitimate occupying power; no such legal niceties exist in Afghanistan.

No rational person believes that "DoD personnel in foreign countries may be subject to its laws." If this fantasy statement conferring illusional autonomy is true, why hasn't even one GI been tried or convicted in an Afghani or Iraqi court of law for any legal violations?

Ranger reckons weasel word "may" is a great big rubber yardstick when it comes to the sovereign nature of the HN laws. In fact, the phrase "some other arrangement" could be interpreted as, "We have our boots on your neck."

Far as FM 3-24's contention that "insurgents have no special status under international law," there is the small matter of a legal conflict: D-15 contradicts the Geneva Conventions. Commentary to the GC IV states:

"Every person in enemy hands must have some status under international law: he is either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention, or again, a member of the medical personnel of the armed forces who is covered by the First Convention. There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law. We feel that this is a satisfactory solution – not only satisfying to the mind, but also, and above all, satisfactory from the humanitarian point of view."

Protocol I, Article 44 to GC III extends P.O.W. status to "insurgents and guerrillas even if they don't distinguish themselves from the civilian population."

Protocol I further gives all combatants, lawful under Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention or not, an equivalent status to 'prisoner of war' with the same rights and protections, when captured, regardless of their adherence to the laws of war. Whilst prisoner of war status under the Third Geneva Convention is contingent upon adherence to the laws of war, under Protocol I no breach of the laws of war can place an enemy combatant outside the scope of any rights or protections afforded to captured lawful enemy combatants.

Protocol I, ratified by 167 countries, was signed by the U.S. in 1977 but has yet to be ratified.

The United Nations and the Geneva Conventions recognize the legitimate nature of insurgency. Not all insurgents are evil or criminal; remember George Washington?

Tomorrow is the 4th of July: What is your Army doing that violates the spirit of the day?

--Jim and Lisa