I heard on the news the other day that an attempt to kill Saddam was OK because he was a legitimate military target as commander in chief of the armed forces. Wouldn’t the same thing apply to George W.?
Does that mean if somebody managed to assassinate Bush the could claim it was an act of war and pay no penalty? Would it have to be a member of the Iraqi military?
Of course Bush is a legimitate military target. But having legitimacy doesn’t mean you have immunity from “prosecution” or other penalties.
If a US special forces person went in an killed Saddam, but was caught, you think they’d just send him on his way? No way, they’d kill him (assuming the captors are loyal to Saddam).
Why would it be any different the other way around? If we caught an assassin, we’d prosecute, regardless of it being an act of war or not.
I am curious about this as well. What does the Geneva Convention and other “Let’s fight a clean war” agreements say about specifically targeting politicians? senior military leaders? and is there a specific definition of each?
Before I start, nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice, nor should anything in this post be considered as encouraging any action, lawful or otherwise.
According to a lawyer on CBC talking the day the war started, Pres. Bush is a legitimate target because as Commander in Chief he has direct orders for military action, just as any military personnel below him are legitimate military targets. Effectively a legitimate target can be summed up as the guy with a gun, or the guy that orders the guy with the gun.
In contrast, the Queen of England is not a legitimate target because she has no direct control of the military where as Tony Blair does.
This lawyer also went on to explain the circumstances under which you could legitimately kill Pres. Bush based on the Geneva Convention; the most important consideration is that you are not allowed to exploit a position of trust, ie his secret service men couldn’t shoot him in the back, but an Iraqi soldier could, unless he dressed up like a secret servicemen.
Also, under the Geneva Convention, that soldier would be entitled to all protection under the Geneva Convention as a POW if he was caught, assuming he did not violate any conditions himself. Neither the US nor Iraq would not be allowed to execute a captured assassin.
There is a sticky note here, though, if you were an American citizen and tried to use the above as protection you could be tried for treason since you were fighting for the enemy.
I can find no specific coverage of this in the Geneva Conventions. Politicians, acting solely as politicians, are civilians and are therefore presumably protected by the 1949 Convention IV and the 1977 Protocol 1 (the latter has not been ratified by US or Iraq). Saddam and George W., however, are also members of the armed services by virtue of their position as Commander-in-Chief, and it would appear that they are therefore fair game.
Whoever they are, they cannot dress as a civilian, pull an Oswald with a rifle, or a McVeigh with a car bomb and pay no penalty. They lose the protection of the Geneva Conventions by doing that and can be legitimately put on trial.
If Iraq had an intercontinental stealth bomber and ifit could evade U.S. all defenses and they bombed the White House got Bush… if the crew, who would need to be wearing a uniform, were shot down and captured - in uniform – they didn’t strip them off trying to escape - they would be entitled to be treated as POWs under the Geneva Conventions.
Or, an Iraqi person who happened to have a uniform in his closet, could put on his uniform, take a rifle, and shoot Bush from a mile away?
No – What was he doing out of uniform (presumably) in the U.S.?
That is a Spy or saboteur – not a soldier – different rules apply.
This was discussed in this recent thread – about What if an Iraqi soldier broke into a stateside base and killed 1000 troops? note what a single Iraqi would have to do to be a POW & not get executed:
Besides wearing the Iraqi uniform* and not specifically targeting civilians, to have POW status he would also have to accomplish the “break in” Commando style, not by pretending to be a civilian or hijacking a bus/plane load of civilians.
*In fact there is a precedent for this: Nazi saboteurs upon landing in the U.S. wore their uniforms, so that if caught on the beach from the sub they would have POW status. Here’s a cite for that
http://pages.prodigy.net/michaelmbbates/column334.htm