DAVID ADAMS reports…
More than 40 per cent of Australians believe captured enemy soldiers can be tortured in certain circumstances but 93 per cent say those who break the “rules of war” should be punished.
Such are the findings of a survey by the Australian Red Cross, released earlier this month to mark the 60th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions.
THE RULES OF WAR: The Geneva Conventions were introduced in 1949 to govern the ways in which wars can be fought. PICTURE: Asif Akbar (www.sxc.hu)
OTHER SURVEY FINDINGS:
• 50 per cent believe combatants should avoid civilians “as much as possible”;
• 84 per cent believe it is wrong to take civilians hostage;
• 93 per cent believe chemical and biological weapons should never be used;
• 68 per cent believe cluster bombs should never be used while 74 per cent believe landmines should never be used;
• 85 per cent believe it is not OK for combatants to kill enemy soldiers even if the other side is killing captured prisoners;
• 90 per cent believe there should be more intervention from the international community to strengthen and enforce the rules of war;
• 90 per cent are aware the Red Cross emblem protects people and objects during times of armed conflict but only 29 per cent are aware it is illegal to use the emblem without the permission of the Minister of Defence.
– SOURCE: ‘PEOPLE AT WAR’, Australian Red Cross
Rebecca Dodd, national manager of international humanitarian law for the Australian Red Cross, says the organisation was “concerned” to see figures showing 43 per cent of Australians believed it was OK to torture captured enemy soldiers in certain cases to obtain important military information “when we know that obviously torture of any kind is a crime, whether it’s committed against detainees or civilians”.
“There’s no doubt that was a surprising result,” she says. “But it’s a bit juxtaposed to the fact that, having said that, you have 96 per cent of the population saying that absolutely civilians should be distinguished and protected in times of armed conflict (and) you have a situation where 93 per cent of those surveyed thought that international justice was important and having those laws enforced. So there was a whole range of results.”
Ms Dodd says it’s important for people to understand that the Geneva Conventions apply universally.
“It isn’t a question of picking and choosing when they apply but that in armed conflict, these are the rules that apply to those who fight, including Australians,” she says. “It’s really important to maintain those Geneva Conventions – they’re what stands, I suppose, between us becoming the very thing that we’re fighting.”
It is the first time the survey – which involved some 1030 people who took part online – has been conducted in Australia, although polls have previously been carried out internationally asking similar questions.
The Geneva Conventions, introduced in the wake of World War II, are part of a system of legal safeguards that stipulate the way in wars can be fought, setting out rules governing issues such as the protection of civilians, aid workers, medics, sick and wounded combatants, shipwrecked troops and prisoners of war.
The last of the four conventions was signed off on 12th August, 1949, but three Additional Protocols have since been adopted, two in 1977 and one in 2005. The latter established the red crystal as an additional emblem to the red cross and red crescent.
All 194 of the world’s states are party to the Geneva Conventions.
While the Red Cross survey found 88 per cent of Australians had heard of the Geneva Conventions, only 32 per cent believed they prevented wars from getting worse and 49 per cent believed they made no difference. Ms Dodd says it is interesting to compare the latter finding with that of surveys completed by people in conflict-affected countries such as in the African nation of Liberia, for example, where only 65 per cent of people had heard of the conventions but of those, 85 per cent thought they had an impact.
“Those respondents were much more positive, I suppose, in terms of how they perceived those Geneva Conventions having an affect…” she notes. “I think it goes to show that we have the luxury of cynicism in Australia; we’re not confronted with these issues…and (it’s) a bit hard, I think, for some Australians to image how it could possibly work.”
Ms Dodd says the international humanitarian law program within Australian Red Cross was all about trying to raise awareness of and educate people about the conventions and what they stand for.
“I think it’s also fair to say that it’s in the breach….of the Geneva Conventions that we read about them.”
Recent high profile examples which have raised public discussion include the prosecution of war criminals at the International Criminal Court in The Hague and the treatment of prisoners held in US custody in Guantanamo Bay.
A resolution affirming Australia’s ongoing support for the Conventions was passed in Federal Parliament last week. Prior to the introduction of the resolution, Australian Red Cross chief executive Robert Tickner presented the Attorney General Robert McClelland with a specially bound copy of the conventions in a symbolic event outside Parliament House in Canberra.
Welcoming the commitment the parliamentary resolution represents from Australia to the international community, Mr Tickner said that until the day “there is no such thing as war” the Geneva Conventions remain essential to protecting all those caught up in conflict.
“Today, 60 years on, as conflict and war continues to rage around the globe they remain as relevant as ever.”