Article 47.-Mercenaries

[TahitiNut]

Article 47.-Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.

2. A mercenary is any person who:

( a ) Is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;

( b ) Does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;

( c ) Is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;

( d ) Is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;

( e ) Is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and

( f ) Has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/protocol1.htm

Chile: UN on the Offensive Against Iraq Mercenaries
IPS
16 July 07 - Mercenary recruitment agencies that send former soldiers to Iraq have been accused in Chile of human right abuses, illegal association, possession of explosives and unauthorised use of army weaponry, and are the target of a special United Nations mission.

Daniela Estrada and Gustavo González/IPS, Santiago - The UN Working Group (UNWG) on the "use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination", established in July 2005 by the then UN Commission on Human Rights, conducted a fact-finding mission about the recruitment firms in Chile this week, and then planned to head to Montevideo.

Senator Alejandro Navarro, of the governing coalition Socialist Party, is the prime mover behind the visit by the delegation, which arrived in Santiago on Monday. He stated that these firms declare legal residence in Uruguay, and that contracts are signed in international airspace while the mercenaries are being flown to the Middle East.

<snip>

Navarro said that U.S. private security companies such as Blackwater and Triple Canopy, who recruit guards at the request of the U.S. government to send into armed conflict zones to protect strategic installations, tend to subcontract to South American firms like Red Táctica Consulting Group.

The owner of the Washington-based Red Táctica is José Miguel Pizarro, a retired general of the Chilean army who lives in the U.S. He is also known as a commentator on Iraq security issues for the U.S. news service CNN.

<snip>

According to Navarro’s estimates, close to 1,200 former members of the Chilean military, mostly retired and with an average age of 40, have gone to Iraq since 2004. They were recruited by private companies who operate in several different countries in order to evade future responsibilities, he said.

At a meeting Tuesday with academics and university researchers, Gómez del Prado emphasised the exponential increase in the number of mercenaries involved in armed conflicts since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

The use of mercenaries is a form of "privatising war," which involves human trafficking and other practices that violate human rights, said Gómez del Prado and Benavides de Pérez.

The UNWG rapporteurs pointed out that "private security guards" had participated alongside U.S. soldiers in the cases of torture perpetrated in the Iraqi prison of Abu Ghraib in 2003.

<snip>

http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/article.php3?id_article=1972

[ChenZhen]

1. Mercenary == Troop you do not have to actually "support"

We love mercenaries because its socially acceptable to continuously hate and berade them. It allows us to hate the war, pretend to love the military, but still have an outlet for our outrage and hatred. While the military has a "few bad apples", all the mercenaries are bad apples. Rather than being well-trained, more mature, militaristic soldiers who simply get paid more, they are instead responsible for Abu Gharib, the destruction of Fulluja, the innocents killed by our smart bombs, the 2 million displaced Iraqis, etc.... Everything the trigger happy, adrenaline junky, under-paid, under-trained, barely past pubescence, bonus signing, "patriotically" misguided, BUT absolutely loveable troops do, we will just pin on the mercenaries...


Something seems really wrong and stupid about this sense of outrage for the mercenaries. Not that its unfounded. Rather, that is disproportionate and paradoxical to the love for the good ol' boy troops that fight for our freedom, who we can never talk bad about without fear of expulsion and ridicule.

[PDenton]

3. Some of those private security groups

Are very professional and they do the most dangerous jobs in Iraq. Yes, they do it for the money but if they thought what they were doing was wrong they wouldn't be doing it.

[TahitiNut]

7. "if they thought what they were doing was wrong they wouldn't be doing it."

One could say the exact same thing about Ted Kascinski or David Berkowitz.

:shrug:

[PA Democrat]

8. Huh? Are we to believe that all of these contractors are morally superior beings who never do wrong

You need to read this article from the Nation magazine:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071008/scahill0921

<snip>

Active duty soldiers who commit crimes or acts of misconduct are prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the court martial system. There have been scores of prosecutions of soldiers-- some 64 courts martial on murder-related charges in Iraq alone. That has not been the case with these private forces. Despite many reports--some from US military commanders--of private contractors firing indiscriminately at Iraqis and vehicles and killing civilians, not a single armed contractor has been charged with any crime. They have not been prosecuted under US civilian law; US military law and the Bush administration banned the Iraqi government from prosecuting them in Iraqi courts beginning with the passage of Coalition Provisional Authority Order 17 in 2004. The message this sends to the Iraqi people is that these hired guns are above any law.

US contractors in Iraq reportedly have their own motto: "What happens here today, stays here today." That should be chilling to everyone who believes in transparency and accountability of US operations and taxpayer funded activities-- not to mention the human rights of the Iraqis who have fallen victim to these incidents and have been robbed of any semblance of justice.

The Iraqi government says it has evidence of seven deadly incidents involving Blackwater. It is essential that the Congress request information on these incidents from the Iraqi authorities. What we do know is that in just the past nine months, Blackwater forces have been involved with several fatal actions. Last Christmas Eve, as Katy mentioned, an off-duty Blackwater contractor allegedly killed a bodyguard for the Iraqi Vice President. Blackwater whisked that individual out of the country. Iraqi officials labeled the killing a "murder" and have questioned privately as to why there has apparently been no consequences for that individual. Blackwater says it fired the individual and is cooperating with the US Justice Department. To my knowledge no charges have yet been brought in that case.

[TahitiNut]

10. I think we MUST be clear about the "pecking order" in Iraq.

At the very top of the pecking order are the global corporations. Immediately below them are the toadies and sycophants operating under the imprimatur of the United States government as "officials" and "representatives." Below them are the "private security forces" and PMCs directly in the employ of those global corporations. Below them are the colonial stooges (Maliki, et. al.) through which the activities of the global corporations are given national cover. Below them are the U.S. military forces and at the very bottom are Iraqi citizens.

When we hear the phrase "U.S. interests" we must interpret that as the coerced entitlements of global corporations. The "interests" are, almost totally, in direct opposition to the vital interests of the citizens of Iraq themselves. Almost nothing could be clearer - since otherwise, massive external military force would not likely be needed.

[Toots]

12. Your argument would make sense if mercenaries were in the news a lot.

This is the only real instance that I am aware of that they have been accused publicly of the things you mention. It was the Marines that killed all those people in Haditha and also in Falluja. Mercenaries have not been much in the news at all. If you are a complete news junkie like most DUers you would have been aware of all the atrocities they have actually committed and of their extent of usage there. Most Americans are not aware even in the slightest of Mercenaries operating in Iraq or of the total number of "Private Contractors" actually being in excess of the number of our Military there.

[TahitiNut]

2. Could a factual, informative post drop any more quickly?

Gosh ... it's too bad those mercenaries aren't breast-feeding in public in Baghdad. :eyes:

Is DU becoming a 'black hole' for IQ points?

[Gonzo Gardener]

22. ...

:shrug:


K&R

[Horse with no Name]

4. Excellent.

But the problem is that they use the word "contractors" instead of "mercenaries".
For Christ sakes, I have seen posts HERE ON DU upset that "contractors" in Iraq didn't get benefits.
Well, when you are making $100k a week, buy your own damned health and life insurance. Invest in your own damned 401k.
I have no pity for any of the contractors that are making huge bucks in Iraq.
This shit has to stop. How that is going to happen, I have no idea.:(
Future History books will certainly write of this period of the US and their Black warfare. Too bad people don't take the time to read about it now.

[Solly Mack]

5. I'll give this a kick and a recommend

[aikoaiko]

6. Does criterion (d) of the definition make US security contractors non mercernary?

:shrug:

[TahitiNut]

9. That's how I'd read it.

Clearly, however, ex-military Chileans or South Africans working as Blackwater paramilitary would be mercenaries - and I'd say they could be summarily executed in a combat zone without violation of the Geneva Conventions. They do not qualify for the protections afforded.

[YankmeCrankme]

11. I don't think so

All US citizens hired by the security firms would be considered mercenaries, because, while they are nationals of a Party (US)to the conflict they aren't residents of the territory (Iraq) controlled by a Party (US) to the conflict.

[TahitiNut]

16. Please note that the logic of item (d) is 'NOT OR' and not 'NAND'

:shrug;

[AlecBGreen]

13. K&R

good find Tahiti

[Crabby Appleton]

14. A slight problem with Article 47 though, it is part of

"1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions (Protocol I)".

It was not ratified by the U.S.

the following link is a list of the countries the ratified Protocol I:

ICRC

[TahitiNut]

15. Notice that Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan are also not signatories.

This is NOT accidental.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. Needless to say. *Sigh*

[KoKo]

18. Retired General on C-Span this a.m. said that combined "contractors"

(mercenaries) and troop levels in Iraq now are about the 300,000 that Gen. Shinsecki said we needed to go in with in the first place. He said to get rid of the contractors we either have to increase regular military (I guess through Draft) or not engage in actions that require so many troops. I'd go for his second suggestion....

K&R

[TahitiNut]

19. Cut off the funding for the PMCs and watch how fast they leave. On their own.

I, for one, would shed very few tears if the funding for PMCs were immediately cancelled.

Who'd buy it for a nanosecond that they'd be "stranded"? Not me.

Who'd believe for a nanosecond that it'd take them 9 months to evacuate Iraq? Not me.

:shrug:

[ManiacJoe]

20. Of course, they would be out quickly.

Their logistics is quite easy. They have very few people to move; the largest pieces of equipment are SUVs and helicopters; and their number of equipment pieces is quite small. They could just abandon the equipment if they really needed to.

The military on the other hand: 140000 people, lots of huge m1 tanks etc., huge numbers of trucks and helicopters etc. It took the military months to get there, it will take the same to leave. However, they could stage the equipment moves from Saudi Arabia like they did on the move in.

[KoKo]

21. Problem is that the PTB want us to stay there....

Congress won't cut the funding because they will be blamed for not supporting "the troops." What most Americans don't know is that half of those troops or more are "Mercenaries and Private Contractor who are not the average soldier or National Guard. I still think average American doesn't know the difference in pay between the two that comes from our tax dollars, either.

[ManiacJoe]

23. You may be right, but I won't make any assumptions

about what the average person knows.

One of the problems here at DU is that way too many people think that most of the contractors are doing security jobs. The vast majority of contractors are actually doing support (food, maintenance, etc) and reconstruction. With us trying to do stabilization and reconstruction at the same time, we need twice as many hands than if we were doing them serially.