On Tuesday, Amnesty International, the global human rights organization, said that patterns of attack conducted by forces on both sides of the battle between ISIS and the Iraqi-American coalition violated international law in Mosul.

The report was released a day after Iraqi Prime minister Haider al-Abadi declared victory for the Iraqi-led forces in the ISIS stronghold city of Mosul almost three years since the the terrorist group captured the city.

A long and bloody nine months of fighting between the forces led to not only thousands of innocent deaths, but caused hundreds of thousands to be displaced from the city.

Amnesty International’s report claims that many of those deaths were not simply casualties of war, rather they were the result of  seemingly indiscriminate and reckless attacks conducted by members from both sides of the conflict. Lynn Maalouf, Director of Research for the Middle East at Amnesty International, expressed the importance of justice for the citizens of Mosul:

The horrors that the people of Mosul have witnessed and the disregard for human life by all parties to this conflict must not go unpunished. Entire families have been wiped out, many of whom are still buried under the rubble today. The people of Mosul deserve to know, from their government, that there will be justice and reparation so that the harrowing impact of this operation is duly addressed.

In its report, Amnesty describes how ISIS forced citizens of Mosul into new areas of the city to effectively use them as “human shields.” By relocating citizens to the western part of Mosul, ISIS created a barrier between its fighters and the Iraqi-American coalition. ISIS was able to keep civilians there by welding doors shut and booby trapping exits, and fighters would kill anyone who tried to escape.

On the flip side, the U.S. and Iraqi coalition chose to use weapons that were much too powerful for their intended targets or take the necessary precautions to protect civilians when conducting attacks. For example the report states on March 17 a U.S. airstrike that targeted two ISIS snipers ended up killing 105 innocent civilians. The report charges that the coalition failed to “adapt their tactics” and ended up doing significantly more harm than necessary.

Military officials from the Pentagon have so far rebuffed the alleged violations of international law. Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend said in a press conference:

I would challenge the people from Amnesty International or anyone else out there who makes these charges to first research their facts and make sure they’re speaking from a position of authority.

Next steps at this point are unknown. Holding states liable for their actions during wartime is difficult, even more so when non-state actors like ISIS are involved. But U.N. officials have said that accountability will be sought for the situation in Mosul.

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post War Crimes in Mosul?: Amnesty Claims All Parties Violated International Law appeared first on Law Street.

A new Dutch probe into the downed Malaysian Airlines passenger jet that crashed in Ukraine in 2014, leading to the death of all 298 passengers, concluded that the missile used to shoot it down was Russian in origin. Investigators also said that Russia participated in the cover-up afterwards. The report mainly confirmed existing speculation that Russia was somehow linked to the attack and is part of international investigators’ attempts to collect enough hard evidence to build a case against Russia.

“Possibly they will bring charges of murder–and possibly even charges of war crimes,” said al-Jazeera’s Neave Barker who was at the news conference in Nieuwegein, Netherlands.

The incident only increased tensions between Russia and the West, and victims’ families are impatient for details about the truth.

“As a family we are impatient. We want to know what happened, how it happened and why? We want those responsible to face justice,” said Silene Fredriksz to media before the news conference. Her 23-year-old son and his girlfriend were on the plane.

The Evidence

The jet had taken off from Amsterdam and was heading toward Kuala Lumpur when it was unexpectedly shot down in July 2014. Though investigators didn’t say explicitly that Russia ordered the attack or named any individuals, the results of the probe show that the missile system, called Buk or SA-11, was delivered from Russia after a request from Russian-backed separatists just hours before it was used. After a missile had been fired and the plane wreck crashed in a field, the missile system was returned to Russia. Investigators made it clear that their intention is to find who is responsible, name suspects and potentially press criminal charges.

All 298 people on board, most of them Dutch citizens, were killed https://t.co/kBSIRtDuJ9

— Al Jazeera News (@AJENews) September 28, 2016

Among the evidence in the report was the testimony of a Russian rebel who allegedly guarded the missile system when it was sent back to Russia after completing its mission. The discovery of a missile nose cone and fin was also an important factor. One piece of evidence that was revealed last year was a piece of shrapnel in one of the pilots’ bodies, with characteristics unique to the exact type of Buk missiles that Russia uses; that particular model is not used by Ukraine.

In phone conversations included in the evidence, separatists were heard requesting the missile system because they wanted to defend themselves against Ukrainian air attacks. They received word that they would get it the same night. The Buk system was brought in by trucks across the Russian border. Prosecutors have figured out the exact route the missile was transported, where it was fired, and how it got back to Russia.

Russia’s Stance

Additional recordings of phone conversations showed the reaction from a militant to his superior when he realized it was not a Ukrainian plane but a passenger jet: “It was 100 per cent a passenger aircraft…there are civilian items, medicinal stuff, towels, toilet paper.”

Shortly after the plane was downed, a separatist leader named Igor Girkin appeared to be boasting about having shot down a Ukrainian military plane on a Russian social media website. He also wrote “We warned them–don’t fly in our sky.” The post was soon deleted.

Russia denies all involvement with the crash and calls the accusations “speculation, unqualified and unprofessional information.” Russian officials also have some interesting versions of what they think happened, including a theory that the CIA stuffed some hundred bodies in a drone and crashed it in Ukraine to discredit Russia. Another one is that Ukraine aimed to shoot down Russian president Putin’s plane but accidentally hit the Malaysian Airlines plane instead.

But even if prosecutors find the responsible individuals, what can they really do about it? Russia’s government prohibits the extradition of Russian citizens to trial in foreign countries. It is also unclear where, if any specific suspects are found and named, they would go to trial.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Probe Shows Missile that Downed Malaysia Airlines Flight is Linked to Russia appeared first on Law Street.

Aleppo, Syria’s largest city, has for months been the staging ground for some of the country’s most intense fighting over its five-year civil war. Since the ceasefire brokered by the U.S. and Russia crumbled last week, Aleppo has been getting mowed down by government airstrikes, killing roughly 200 people, in what residents and rescue workers are calling the most severe surge in the city yet. On Tuesday, the neighborhood of Farafra–in the rebel-held eastern half of Aleppo–was captured by government forces, as the government pushes to control the entire city.

Reports from the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights indicate the fighting has spread to the city’s historic quarter, one of the world’s oldest settlements and home to a mosque that dates back to the 8th century. The mosque, Umayyad Mosque, a UNESCO World Heritage site, lost its minaret due to the fighting in 2013. The Syrian Observatory also said government airstrikes killed 11 people in the eastern half  of the city, while rebels shelled the government-held villages in the western half, Nubal and Zahraa.

The past week has seen President Bashar al-Assad’s government use, for the first time, bunker-busting bombs that obliterate buildings and collapse underground bunkers.

“Bunker-busting bombs, more suited to destroying military installations, are now destroying homes, decimating bomb shelters, crippling, maiming, killing dozens, if not hundreds,” said Matthew Rycroft, Britain’s ambassador to the United Nations at an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting on Syria on Sunday.

VIDEO: Drone footage shows the scale of destruction caused by air strikes in Aleppo, #Syria. – @Reuters pic.twitter.com/zOcAdfbMEQ

— Conflict News (@Conflicts) September 27, 2016

Ban Ki-moon, the U.N. Secretary-General, also condemned Assad’s use of bunker-busters: “They are demolishing ordinary people looking for any last refuge of safety,” he said. “International law is clear: The systematic use of indiscriminate weapons in densely populated areas is a war crime.”

During that meeting, which was spearheaded by the U.S. and Britain, council members blasted Assad for committing war crimes. Russia, Syria’s main ally in the fight against the Islamic State and Syrian rebel groups, was lambasted for abetting Assad in his cruelty.

The fight is showing few signs of abating anytime soon. A Syrian military general told the Associated Press that the campaign in Aleppo, which has left thousands of residents trapped in the city with dwindling supplies of food and water, will continue until all “terrorists” are “wiped out.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Aleppo is Pounded as Government Forces Press Toward City’s Historic Quarter appeared first on Law Street.

This morning, Donald Trump called into “Fox and Friends” to explain what he would do to take down ISIS. While outlining his strategy he voiced some incredibly disturbing, legally questionable, and morally wrong ideas. Check out the clip for yourself:

.@realDonaldTrump: “I’d knock the hell out of ISIS… you have to take out their families.” https://t.co/ju4LYTl0JV

— FOX & Friends (@foxandfriends) December 2, 2015

Yup, Donald Trump said that in order to fight ISIS we have to “take out their families,” and that we’re fighting too politically correct of a war, in which we’re just too worried about civilian casualties.

Here’s the issue: what Donald Trump is advocating for by targeting ISIS members’ families is pretty much a crime against humanity. Whether or not he’d actually ever be held responsible for it is a whole different matter, given that the U.S. is not party to the various international courts that actually punish perpetrators. But what Donald Trump is advocating for isn’t just a show of aggression, or tough tactics against ISIS. It’s fundamentally against what we, as humans, have decided is acceptable in war.

International law is a complicated, very gray field. But there are some basics that it lays out. These are things that we’ve all pretty much universally decided should be illegal in war. There are “peremptory norms,” sometimes referred to as jus cogens, that lay out the things that are never acceptable under any circumstances. Peremptory norms include things like acts of genocide, slavery, and torture. That’s not to say that these things never happen, but more that they are viewed as the worst of the worst. Peremptory norms include crimes against humanity, which specifically forbid killing any civilians on purpose. While it’s pretty well recognized that sometimes civilian casualties are unavoidable, directly targeting civilians is always unacceptable.

There’s also Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions which forbids: “murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture” for “persons taking no active part in the hostilities.” The idea that killing civilians is morally unacceptable has been reiterated in court over and over again, beginning with the Nuremberg Trials. Put very simply: we, as humans, have decided time and time again that directly targeting civilians in war, regardless of who they may be related to, is wrong.

Michael Walzer, a professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study, discussed Trump’s statements with Mic, saying:

The crucial moral and … legal requirement … is to distinguish between combatants and civilians, and noncombatants and to attack only the combatants. To target the innocent is the worst crime of war.

International law truly is a gray area, and the U.S. hasn’t always been great about following it. We haven’t ratified the treaty that created the International Criminal Court, and we have a contentious history with accepting rulings by the International Court of Justice. Yet for one of our leading presidential candidates to argue that we should purposefully and publicly break international principles is beyond the pale. If we stoop to the level of committing atrocities against civilians, we are truly no better than our enemies.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Donald Trump’s New Strategy to Fight ISIS: Crimes Against Humanity? appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

On Monday, 93-year-old Oskar Groening, an SS guard assigned to Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II, was charged with 300,000 counts of accessory to murder by German prosecutors. Not many of us were alive to experience World War II, but I know someone who was around back then who tells stories like it happened just yesterday. My grandmother, also 93, recounts stories from that time, and my grandfather’s brother was a B-24 bomber pilot who was killed in France in 1944.

So many families all over the world were affected by that war, most notably by one of the most vile men this world has ever seen — Adolf Hitler. More than a million people lost their lives between 1935 – 1945. Groening, in particular, has always been very open about his experiences at the concentration camp. He recounted a horrendous story to German Magazine Der Spiegel in 2005 of witnessing “another SS soldier grab the baby by the legs and smashed the baby’s head against the iron side of a truck until it was silent.”

German authorities are able to charge Groening with these 300,000 counts thanks to the trial of former camp guard John Demjanjuk in 2011. In a legal first in Germany, a Munich court found that simply demonstrating Demjanjuk’s employment at the camp, rather than his involvement in specific murders, was enough to implicate him in the killings committed there. Demjanjuk was sentenced to five years of imprisonment for helping the Nazis kill almost 30,000 Jews during his time at the Sobibór extermination camp in German-occupied Poland during World War II. Demjanjuk was sentenced to five years in jail, which seems a bit unfair given the extent of the crimes, but at 91 a life sentence could possibly only be a few more years than that.

It’s frustrating to know that people like Groening and Demjanjuk were able to live long lives without answering for what they had done. I know that it is difficult to really say what they actually took part in and how much fear they may have had if they went against Hitler, but at some point they made a decision to participate, and that is something they have to pay for. There can be so much hatred and evil in a single person.

There are still more than 20 people remaining for the German courts to prosecute in conjunction to war crimes from War World II, but for now focusing on Oskar Groening is good enough. Every family deserves justice when it comes to the death of loved ones.

In Oskar Groening’s case it isn’t just the families who deserve justice — it is the entire world.

—

Allison Dawson (@AllyD528) Born in Germany, raised in Mississippi and Texas. Graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University. Currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative.

Featured image courtesy of [leliebloem via Flickr]

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post 93 Year Old Charged With 300,000 Counts of Accessory to Murder appeared first on Law Street.