March 24, 2003

The Geneva Convention : Homes that Go BOOM in the Night

[Bethlehem, West Bank] With the exception of one demolished home, the situation here in Bethlehem has been relatively quiet. There are almost no Israeli military vehicles to be seen. Of course the borders between the West Bank and Israel are closed to Palestinians, but I've only seen one or two Army jeeps in Bethlehem in the last few days. The fighter planes have been flying overhead, but there's not much on the ground. To be honest, I thought it might be terrible. When the US invaded Afghanistan, Israel invaded the West Bank, and it got pretty nasty here. And there was virtually no international news about that then. So I thought this might be another opportunity for the Israeli Army. I'm glad that I was wrong, and it's been quiet (so far).

The more I talk about the Geneva Convention, the more I realize how little I know. Is it considered part of International Law? I'm told it isn't law, but just an agreement. So until I do some more reading, I retract all the statements I made about Israel breaking International law when they violated the terms of the Geneva Convention. My mistake. I need to do more research. Are the terms of the Convention merely suggestions? And are they only applicable between the countries who signed it? The US signed it. Israel did too.

President George Bush mentioned the Geneva Convention yesterday when he spoke about the treatment of Prisoners of War. He said that Iraq had better abide by the terms of the agreement or else they would be considered war criminals. And I agree with President Bush. I think all countries ought to follow it.

For example, here's Article 53 of the Geneva Conventions:

Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

And here's another good one -- Article 33 of the Geneva Conventions:

No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and like all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

With this in mind, let's visit a Bethlehem property I saw recently.

This home is nothing but a pile of rubble now. The Israeli Army blew it up a few nights ago. The blast woke me, and it was a mile or two from my apartment. Evidently, this was the home of the parents of a suicide bomber. The bomber wasn't quite a bomber, since he was shot before he blew himself up. Did the family personally attempt the bombing?

Now according to my understanding (which is regrettably sometimes flawed), demolishing this home would violate (at least) the above two articles of the Geneva Convention. So is a violation of the Geneva Convention a big deal or not? Evidently it does not necessarily constitute a violation of International Law. So maybe it's not that important. Big deal, just a couple of Geneva Convention violations. It happens dozens of times in the West Bank and Gaza each week. So what?

But then I remember that both President Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair mentioned yesterday that Iraq had better follow the Geneva Convention to the letter. That sort of sounds like the agreement is important after all. Maybe it's as important as the UN Resolutions. Is that fair to say?

It's odd, I can clearly remember President Bush and Prime Minister Blair saying that Iraq had to follow the UN Resolutions and the Geneva Convention or else. Maybe my memory isn't very good, but I can't quite remember them saying that other countries had to do the same.

Listen, I'm not anti-anyone, but I think we should be fair.