A Life Half Lived

by Andrew MacLeod

  The US became involved and negotiated a new pact between the Croats and the Muslims, in order for them to develop a united front. In August 1995, the Croatians launched Operation Storm and pushed the Serbs out of the Serb Krajina. The Muslim Fifth Corp led a parallel push called Operation Flash, toward the Serb stronghold of Banja Luka. Both were supported by the United States. Suddenly the Serbs wanted to negotiate.

  The parties met at Dayton in Ohio, USA, and after long negotiations agreed on the plan that stopped the war but fell well short of peace. The resulting agreement is still in place. It may have lasted since 1995 but many simply look at Bosnia as a frozen war. Without the on-going international forces in the country, few believe Bosnia could exist, even today.

  All sides perpetrated huge crimes, leading to the creation of an International Criminal Tribunal set up in The Hague to hear the crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Radovan Karadzic is on trial today. Izetbegovic and Tudjman both died in their countries, and Milosevic died during his trial.

  My Role in the Former Yugoslavia in 1996: First Mission Yugoslavia was to be my first mission as a Dissemination and Co-operation Delegate for the International Committee of the Red Cross. November 16, 1996, marked my arrival in Belgrade as a wet-behind-the-ears delegate. I was enormously curious about some very simple things such as what would an ICRC Delegation look like? What would Belgrade be like to live in? Being a fan of history, I wanted to know the city’s background.

  Belgrade is a city that has had strategic importance for more than 5000 years. It sits at the meeting of the Sava and Danube rivers on the southern part of the Central European plain that extends through Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and the former Yugoslavia. Its geographical importance, at the crossroads between Europe and Asia, between Christendom and Islam, is obvious from a strategic look at any map. Perhaps that is why it’s a city that claims, as part of its culture, to be the city destroyed and rebuilt more times than any other in human history. As the capital of what was then the remains of Yugoslavia, Belgrade was not a city recovering from war. Rather it was one that tried hard to pretend the war never happened. It was and is a lively city, with parks, gardens and people going about their daily business without much hindrance. Its buildings have more architectural beauty than you may expect.

  The city is blessed with a number of sporting facilities. One statistic that appealed to me was the number of Olympic-sized swimming pools. Being a swimmer and water polo player, this would be good for me.

  My job would range from discussions with relevant authorities about protection of the Red Cross symbol; responsibility for coordinating a program with the Yugoslav Army for incorporation of Law of War training into existing military training structures; negotiations with the army about protection of Red Cross workers, co-operation with the Yugoslav Red Cross to ensure that it could undertake its tasks; and to liaise with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Delegation in Belgrade. Working with the Yugoslav Red Cross, I attended many of their activities in order to better understand their operations.

  If I had any hope of understanding my job, then an early trip to Bosnia to learn as much as I could was needed. The drive to Bosnia tested my belief in reality. One heads northwest out of Belgrade in the direction of Croatia along a highway that Tito called ‘The Highway of Brotherhood and Unity’. After 100 km or so, a left turn leads straight into Bosnia-Herzegovina, and here the world slowly changes. At first there were occasional signs of war. Soon, however, pock-marked buildings gave way to small amounts of destruction until eventually entire villages and valleys of ruin lay ahead. On the road, traffic jams were created not by civilian traffic, but by the international peacekeeping vehicles clogging the roads: Russian BMPs, American Hummvies, assorted bits of military hardware driven by Canadians, Poles, Turks, Greeks, Italians, French and more. Almost every country that is in NATO, and those that want to be, had some force in Bosnia – even the Romanians.

  Out of the land cruiser’s windows all I could see were the remains of people’s lives; what was left of their properties and way of life. My senses were tested as the beautiful landscape was dotted by the devastation caused by landmines, on the journey toward Sarajevo. Villages that would once have been full of farmers oblivious to the larger events going on around them, are now ‘cleansed’, empty, or slowly being repopulated by refugees and those displaced from other cleansed areas. Their presence is given away by the abundance of plastic sheeting that bears the trademark ‘UNHCR’.

  In these villages children learned too late the motto, ‘If you don’t know, don’t go’ – a reference to the abundance of mines that would go on killing the innocent and unsuspecting, mostly children, for years after a conflict had ended. These were the days before the campaign for which Princess Diana was a figurehead and the anti-landmine treaty. ICRC staff knew very well the threat that these hidden killers posed, having been told quite clearly that during the drive to Sarajevo, if we needed to urinate, we should get out of the car and do it on the bitumen. A walk across a stream to find privacy behind a tree presented a risk of leaving you without a leg. Those landmines inevitably attracted the attention of curious children, who by merely playing lost an arm, leg or their life.

  Five hours after leaving Belgrade, I entered Sarajevo. The old town had a Muslim charm, with its winding alleyways dotted with little shops, restaurants and cafes. It was and still is a legacy from centuries ago when that part of the world was ruled as part of the greater Ottoman Empire. In Sarajevo, a linguistic and cultural line divides Cultural Europe from Cultural Asia, much like the Bosporus Strait divides the two continents geographically. The minarets of the many mosques dot the old and new parts of the town, standing very close to synagogues as well as Orthodox and Catholic churches, reminding passers-by of the multicultural nature of this city. It was the multicultural mix, once a source of great pride for the city that, during the 1990s, proved its most tragic downfall.

  I arrived in Sarajevo to hear of the death of her people and of the lifestyles now gone. Evidence screamed from every burnt shop, destroyed house, every bullet hole and every one of the thousands of booby-traps and mines. Most of all, the failing humanity of the destroyed city made its cry from the thousands of new graves, and the hundreds of souls that must still be lying unknown and buried among the myriad fallen structures. The soccer fields, having seen their last game years earlier, had become ad hoc graveyards for the city during the siege as access to graveyards outside the city was blocked.

  Sarajevo’s airport was the focus of much world attention during the war. All but a small part of it was controlled by the Serb forces that encircled the city. A small corridor was given over to the UN to allow humanitarian flights, so long as none of the city’s inhabitants used that part of the airport as their escape route from the city. Citizens found that if they tried to flee across the UN-controlled section of the airport, UN soldiers would have to honour the agreement not to allow them to pass. At night this was done by shining a floodlight on those fleeing, which turned them into targets for surrounding snipers. The residents of Sarajevo became so desperate to flee that at one point they tunnelled right under the airport. I can’t help wondering how the UN soldiers may have felt to be unintentionally helping snipers kill innocent people. Many peacekeepers who served in Bosnia have never recovered from the psychological trauma of standing by and watching the catastrophe unfold in front of them and yet had the power, but no authority, to stop it. The tunnel is now a tourist attraction. Many in Sarajevo still hold a special place in their hearts for the United Nations, but for them there is no association of that organisation with kindness.

  In the ICRC Delegation there was a photograph of a little boy, perhaps seven years old. Most of his life’s memories must be of war, or of hell. In the photograph he is squatting while propped up against a faded brown wall. He is holding a little toy rifle, for he is just taking a break from the game he is playing with his friends. The photograph made me wonder if
the war he has seen makes him want to play his games for real. He reminds me of why it is that an organisation such as the Red Cross needs to exist.

  So How Does the Red Cross Work? The International Committee of the Red Cross is a strange organisation. Many people simply associate the Red Cross with first aid or medicine, and although that is partly true, it is not completely accurate. The ICRC is an organisation far more comfortable working in a war-related environment than in peace. It was formed in war and through the Geneva Conventions it is integrally linked with war.

  On June 24, 1859 the Austrian and French armies clashed at Solferino, a town in northern Italy. After 16 hours of fighting, the battlefield was strewn with 40,000 dead and wounded men. That same evening Henry Dunant, a Swiss citizen, arrived in the area on business. He was horrified by what he saw: for want of adequate medical services in both armies, thousands of wounded soldiers were left to suffer untended, abandoned to their fate. Without discrimination, Dunant immediately set about organising care for them, helped by civilians from neighbouring villages. To prevent any recurrence of the situation he had observed, Dunant proposed two ideas: the establishment of societies for providing relief to the wounded, and the adoption of a convention to protect wounded soldiers and medical personnel on the battlefield. He wrote: “Would it not be possible, in time of peace and quiet, to form relief societies for the purpose of having care given to the wounded in wartime by zealous, devoted and thoroughly qualified volunteers?

  “On certain special occasions, as, for example, when princes of the military art belonging to different nationalities meet – would it not be desirable that they should take advantage of this sort of congress to formulate some international principle, sanctioned by a Convention inviolate in character, which, once agreed upon and ratified, might constitute the basis for societies for the relief of the wounded?”

  The first of these ideas led to the creation of the National Red Cross (and, later, Red Crescent) Societies, and the second to the development of modern International Humanitarian Law, which first found written expression in the Geneva Convention of 1864.

  Very early in their career, each employee of the Red Cross learns the seven fundamental principles of the Red Cross movement – Humanity, Impartiality, Neutrality, Independence, Voluntary Service, Unity and Universality – from which all of the operations are derived. Only with these basic principles can a mosaic of almost 170 national societies, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (ICRC), and the IFRC, have any hope at all of working closely together.

  The Geneva Conventions, and International Humanitarian Law contained within them, are under the guardianship of the International Committee for the Red Cross, the only major international conventions not overseen by the United Nations. International Humanitarian Law, also known as the ‘law of armed conflicts’ or the ‘law of war’, is the body of rules that in wartime protect persons who are not, or are no longer participating in the hostilities, and limits methods and means of warfare.

  The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977 are the principal instruments of International Humanitarian Law. Other humanitarian texts do exist, such as the 1925 Geneva Protocol banning the use of gas and the 1980 Weapons Convention adopted under the auspices of the United Nations.

  As the promoter of International Humanitarian Law, the ICRC contributes to its development and, to that end, prepares for the work of diplomatic conferences empowered to adopt new texts. At each stage in the codification of humanitarian law, it prepares drafts that form the basis of the texts adopted by states. This is how the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977 came into being.

  As the custodian of International Humanitarian Law, the ICRC has been mandated by the international community to monitor its application by the parties to a conflict. It does this through its delegates in the field. The Red Cross works to ensure:

  • The civilian population is properly respected, that is, protected against hostilities.

  • Prisoners of war are treated in accordance with the provisions of the Third Geneva Convention.

  • The population of occupied territory receives adequate supplies. Where this is not the case, the ICRC reminds the belligerents of their obligations under the Conventions.

  In this capacity, the ICRC encourages states to take practical steps in peacetime to ensure that the rules of humanitarian law will be applied in the event of war, for instance:

  • Adoption of provisions for the prosecution of war criminals.

  • Adoption of legislation to protect the emblem. It also reminds States of their obligation to disseminate International Humanitarian Law and supports their efforts in that direction.

  Finally, the ICRC itself strives to spread knowledge of humanitarian law, particularly among the armed forces, and organises a large number of seminars on the subject.

  The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is made up of three components: the ICRC, the national societies (for example the British, American, and other Red Cross Societies) and the IFRC. The ICRC has the mandate to operate in conflict. Each national society has the mandate to operate in its own country and the IFRC has the mandate to facilitate exchange between national societies. Independent from the others, each is governed ultimately by the statutes of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, created by an international conference made up of one representative of each state party to the Geneva Conventions and one representative of each national Red Cross Society. As a result, the Red Cross Movement is partly an international governmental organisation and partly an international nongovernmental organisation. It has a distinct and separate legal personality recognised under international law and has permanent observer status at the United Nations.

  The ICRC sees itself as the ‘Custodian of the Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross Movement’. It is the ICRC’s responsibility to verify that future national Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies are able to conduct their activities in accordance with those principles and to grant them official recognition and to ensure that the national Red Cross Society is acting as a humanitarian organisation, not as a puppet of government. In its own country, every national Red Cross Society serves as an auxiliary to the public authorities in humanitarian matters, and its primary task is to back up the army medical services in time of conflict. To do that, a national Red Cross Society has to prepare itself in peacetime. In addition, each national society may carry out specific peacetime activities such as blood collecting, training first-aid workers and nurses, running dispensaries or hospitals, and providing aid to the disabled, young and the elderly.

  The IFRC provides support for the humanitarian activities carried out by the national societies on behalf of vulnerable groups. By coordinating international relief operations in disaster situations and encouraging development aid, it endeavours to prevent and alleviate human suffering.

  I was to learn quickly that co-operation between the different branches of the Red Cross was not as easy as one should hope. Indeed, in many circumstances, co-operation and liaison with the military was often easier than co-operation with colleagues in the Red Cross Movement.

  Collaborating with the Military in Serbia and Bosnia One of my critical roles as the Dissemination Delegate was to oversee the relationship with the Armed Forces for all aspects of International Humanitarian Law training. It may seem strange that a humanitarian organisation like the ICRC develops close relationships with the military around the world. But consider this: in any conflict area we now think it is natural that humanitarian organisations deliver aid and supplies to vulnerable people. We often see peacekeepers within many of these conflicts. The fact is, in modern warfare, belligerent parties, neutral peacekeeping forces and humanitarian workers all have legitimate roles within the battlefield and they all need to know how to work together.

  In the midst of a war or crisis, civilians must be given the means to stay alive today and
to survive tomorrow. Combatants (soldiers) and non-combatants (civilians) must be kept separate and the life and livelihoods of aid workers and the people they are trying to help need to be protected. This is what IHL aims to do and why ICRC delegates train soldiers in IHL around the world; aid workers do have a legitimate role to play in the battlefield and that role must be respected.

  One may wonder if this is naïve. Many people naturally question how, in the context of an on-going armed conflict, one can hope to have all of these principles, laws and humanitarian objectives, complied with. There is little likelihood of a body of law being observed unless soldiers are familiar with it. The dissemination delegate has to figure out how to adapt the basic teaching of IHL into local settings so that soldiers do become familiar with it. The delegate must learn local cultural values very quickly and think of ways to incorporate teaching in a way that is seen as appropriate within that culture.

  I often liken it to speeding laws. Everyone agrees that speeding laws should exist, and we all agree that many people, ourselves included, often break speeding laws. However, we don’t say that speeding laws should be abandoned just because most people, at some time in their lives, break these laws. Instead, we continue education around the laws of speeding and by doing so, hope to reduce the amount of times that people speed and in the process kill and injure people.

  IHL is the same. By spreading the knowledge and mechanisms to comply with IHL, the ICRC hopes that the breaches and contraventions of the law, and the humanitarian catastrophe that follows as a result, are reduced. Ideally those breaches would be eliminated, but pragmatically it is about reduction.

  One of the difficult things to understand about the laws of armed conflict is that in international law soldiers are allowed to fight and are allowed to kill opposing soldiers. The Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law prohibit soldiers from such actions as rape, pillage and murder, but do set out the laws by which soldiers, when following lawful military commands within an organised military structure, can ‘participate directly in hostilities’. The Geneva Conventions allow soldiers to fight, so long as they are doing so within the agreed rules.