Posted on 07/24/2014 10:48:10 PM PDT by tcrlaf
The International Committee of the Red Cross said Wednesday that it considered Ukraine to be in a state of civil war, urging both sides to respect the laws of conflict as civilians bear the brunt.
The formal classification means participants in the fighting between government forces and pro-Russian separatists in the east could eventually be prosecuted for war crimes in international courts.
"Fighting in eastern Ukraine continues to take its toll on civilians, and we urge all sides to comply with international humanitarian law, otherwise known as the law of armed conflict," ICRC director of operations Dominik Stillhart said in a statement.
"These rules and principles apply to all parties to the non-international armed conflict in Ukraine, and impose restrictions on the means and methods of warfare that they may use," he added.
The Swiss-based humanitarian body is the watchdog for the Geneva Conventions, the rules governing conduct in conflict.
The Red Cross uses the term "non-international armed conflict" for civil war.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
They have been trying very hard, since this episode began, to control the language of the conflict and deny that it is a civil war, but instead an "Anti-terrorist Operation" against "Russian Invaders".
This obliges both parties to treat captured as POW's, and protect civilians.
Before asking you ‘how the Red Cross could do that—make a determination that a country is at civil war’, I searched the words in parenthesis and found under an ‘Intnatl law’ category:
“The International Committee of the Red Cross is the legally recognized custodian of the laws of war.”
So, point well taken.
PS Have you ever seen a commie drink a glass of water?
There is no real civil war in the Ukraine. It’s really a proxy struggle between Russia (who still regards the region as their “breadbasket”) and the European Union.
Remember that Putin’s “Eurasian Union” is a new form of the old USSR, with no specific focus on communism.
Oh yes, so-called “international humanitarian law”. The corrupt UN is steeped in it, and they and other “international” organizations have pushed a leftist bent on it for ages.
Just sayin’. Don’t have a cow.
I’m on board with you on the UN.
But the Red Cross—you know, we can pretend to be North Korea and stick our heads in the sand, but the ICRC carries some weight with the rest of the world.
You forgot to mention that the Red Cross could assign some formal blame to, say, the airliner downing.
All this article does is establish the categorical fact that the rest of the world, excepting yourself, considers the conflict in Ukraine to be a “civil war.”
(Maybe “the war of Russian aggression”?)
heh...
When did progressives care for civilians?....
Especially in Russia..
You know... EVER!...
....”These rules and principles apply to all parties to the non-international armed conflict in Ukraine, and impose restrictions on the means and methods of warfare that they may use,” he added”.....
Wonder how that’s going to go down with all the bruts in that theater. It’s be like asking an Islamic fighter to show compassion.
"non-international armed conflict"Reminds me of global tranquility.
“There is no real civil war in the Ukraine.”
It seems that the Red Cross, the arbitrator of those determinations, by International Law, disagrees....
Designating a Civil War is important for a lot of reasons, not just for prisoners and civilians.
PING....
The Red Cross is no arbiter of international politics. Nor is “International Law” a valid entity, what with tyrants subverting its definition all the time.
If one side of said alleged “civil war” is openly in favor of an outside entity (Russia), it cannot be a civil war by definition. And the opposing sides are in favor of differing outside entities, in addition.
Hit the nail on the head there.
How can it be a civil war when the rebels are funded, supplied, trained, and armed by Moscow with heavy weapon systems like SAMs that shoot down commercial airliners.
Furthermore Russian troops are firing missiles and artillery at Ukrainian troops from inside Russian territory.
And of course by your own admisssion Russian rebels are shooting down commercial airliners allbeit “accidentally”, of course. Let me remind you what you said:
“Actually, I said from the beginning that the rebels accidently shot it down.”
{”rebels” of course being a euphemism for “Russians” since in Ukraine they are one and the same]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3184459/posts?page=45#37
You were absolutely not surprised that MH17 was downed by the Russian rebels and seemed to have inside information of their involvement from the very beginning. Perhaps you can share that inside information with us and we will forward to the Red Cross and Anatoly.
That is your post, isn’t it —
What the hell does Russia care about international law? Seriously.
I would say that it's more likely that our FR neo-Bolsheviks will be unhappy. They lose the ability to make another red [snort] herring argument.
And then there is this:
‘The most significant find today was we went into a heavily wooded area and found a huge piece of fuselage ...
in a wooded area and it almost appeared out of nowhere because there were no tell-tale signs, no broken branches, nothing to indicate that a piece of fuselage had landed there...
investigators had made ‘extraordinary’ finds.
Are the Russian rebels playing hide and seek with the bodies and the plane parts??
I still want to know why they hacksawed that one piece. What would be the purpose? There’s probably shrapnel holes all over the aircraft.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.