UK cluster bombs may be war crime

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=442590&section=news | Reuters

[Sir Gawain]

LONDON (Reuters) - British use of cluster bombs in the Iraq war could count as a war crime and justifies further investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor in the Hague, a group of international lawyers say.

Seven academics from Britain, Ireland, France and Canada interviewed eyewitnesses and examined evidence to see if there was a case for referring British conduct to the court, said the pressure group Peacerights, which organised the review.

"There is a considerable amount of evidence of disproportionate use of force causing civilian casualties," one of the lawyers, Professor Bill Bowring of London Metropolitan University, told a news conference on Tuesday.

"The U.S. cannot be tried before the court because it refuses to sign up to it. The UK did."

Cluster munitions are small bomblets scattered on a target area by larger bombs, rockets or artillery shells, designed to destroy infantry or soft skinned vehicles.

Use of bunker-busting munitions had also killed civilians, Peacerights said.

"THIS ONE GOES TO TOP"

ICC officials were unavailable to comment, but Bowring said senior politicians, possibly including Prime Minister Tony Blair, could have something to worry about.

"Heads of state are not immune in principle," the law professor said. "This one goes right to the top."

U.S.-based Human Rights Watch said last month more than 1,000 civilians were killed or wounded by some 13,000 U.S. and British cluster bombs in the Iraq war last year.

Bowring said British aircraft had dropped 70 cluster bombs and British artillery fired 2,000 cluster shells.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said cluster munitions were lawful weapons that had been used in line with international law during the war to oust Saddam Hussein.

British forces had "of course" not been involved in war crimes, he added.

Bowring said the report would be sent to both the British attorney general Lord Goldsmith and the ICC.

Experts were dubious the case would proceed.

"Instinctively, it seems probable that political pressure will be bought to bear to prevent this going to the ICC," barrister Hugo Charlton told Reuters.

The British military was also the subject of complaints to the ICC last July when Greek lawyers sent the court a dossier of human rights allegations in Iraq.

The court has received hundreds of complaints from dozens of countries since it came into force in July 2002, but only one formal investigation has been launched, into reported crimes in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

[Sir Gawain]

Link

[ken5050]

Maybe if Blair is convicted, Bush will offer him safe-harbour in the USA...

[epluribus_2]

That settles it - Release Saddam Now! /europsycho-off

[Atlantic Friend]

Oh, for Pete's sake ! French civilians were killed by Allied bombers during WWII, but guess what, the pilots were jolly not to blame, because the bombers did not take off to kill innocent civilians but to attack the industrial capacity of a nation that was held captive by a monstrous dictator...exactly like in Iraq !

These Peacerights peaceniks would probably have preferred that no bombs were dropped on the heads of the nice Baathist thugs, who SO knew how to torture without disturbing the peaceniks' sleep...

[RandomUserName]

more than 1,000 civilians were killed or wounded by some 13,000 U.S. and British cluster bombs

I'd say that was a remarkable job of not hitting civilians. They should be given awards for producing so little collateral damage from so many wide area of effect bombs.

[Lucky Dog]

It seems that facts, historical precedent nor the force of logic has any bearing to the types who attempt to bring such charges in the ICC.

Using the past as a guide to gage the motives of these so called "peaceniks," it would appear that they are only interested in using whatever means at their disposal to gain power and push their agenda. No doubt there are some well meaning souls fitting Lenin's term of "useful idiots" that are being used by the others. Nonethelss, the impact and goal remains the same.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

[Cicero]

Hopefully this will encourage Blair and the Brits to rethink their capitulation to the NWO and the international courts. If you allow yourself to be subject to courts on which no restraints can be placed and which are not responsible to any kind of political process, then abuses of this kind will naturally follow.

Bush's wisdom in not allowing US citizens to be subjected international tribunals has been obvious to Freepers. Now maybe it will become more apparent to Blair what the dangers are.

[Right Wing Professor]

It didn't take them long to do what everyone here knew they would - start using the ICC as a leftist political tool. Tony Blair has only himself to blame: they didn't have to ratify the ICC, but they did.

[steveo]

Seven academics = pantyheads

[Atlantic Friend]

Well, it will be the ICC's big test. If the ICC guys are serious about judging truly damning crimes, they'll send this "case" to the nearest incinerator. If they do accept to work on this ridiculous accusation, then every national leader with half a brain will have to dump the ICC for good.

It's as if France and Great Britain sued Uncle Sam for not declaring war to Nazi Germany in 1939, or the Chinese suing all of us because we could have rolled Japan backed earlier... But wait, maybe it will be the next big thing in Peacerights' offices ?

[Lucky Dog]

Well said! One wonders why "common sense" seems so uncommon.

[FreedomPoster]

Horse manure on the entire concept.

I still remember watching Rumsfeld at one of his early Pentagon press conferences during Afghanistan (paraphrasing):

Presstitute (accusatory tone): "Is it true we are using cluster bombs, and if so, why?"

Rumsfeld: "We are trying to kill Al-Qaedas. You." (points to next questioner)

A truly classic moment, I wish I had a vid clip. Press weenies were aghast.

[Atlantic Friend]

I don't know, it is a constant source of amazement - and consternation - to me. I often think these people should be grilled on live TV by diplomats, generals, intelligence officers, and ordinary citizens so they could tell the world what the Coalition (or any other world player) should have done, in their not-so-humble opinion.

Should thugs take them hostage, it seems, they would sue their SWAT liberators for riddling the house with bullets and burning their carpets with flash-bang grenades...

[Atlantic Friend]

I don't know, it is a constant source of amazement - and consternation - to me. I often think these people should be grilled on live TV by diplomats, generals, intelligence officers, and ordinary citizens so they could tell the world what the Coalition (or any other world player) should have done, in their not-so-humble opinion.

Should thugs take them hostage, it seems, they would sue their SWAT liberators for riddling the house with bullets and burning their carpets with flash-bang grenades...

[Poincare]

If one is going to talk about war crimes, then the Klinton-Klark bombing of the civilian infrastructure of Serbia tops the list, de facto and de jure.

[antiRepublicrat]

because the bombers did not take off to kill innocent civilians but to attack the industrial capacity of a nation that was held captive by a monstrous dictator

Well, except for that little Dresden thing.

[telebob]

And of course the ICC has no interest in taking up the case of Iraqi soldiers staging attacks from mosques, schools, civilian neighborhoods.

And of course no interest in prosecuting any of the multitude of tinpot tyrants subjecting innocents to barbarism, especially of the Islamist variety.

[Atlantic Friend]

Interesting case in point. Would you say Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes ?

[SirAllen]

"The U.S. cannot be tried before the court because it refuses to sign up to it. The UK did."

And thank God we didn't. Just think, the democratic nomination (whoever that ends up being) will want to sign us up.