Module 3 the Law in Action 3

Module 3 The law in action 3

Which rules are most often violated and why? What dilemmas do combatants face? Who is responsible for respecting IHL?

23 Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL EDUCATION MODULES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE International Committee of the Red Cross 19, avenue de la Paix 1202 Geneva, Switzerland T +41 22 734 60 01 F +41 22 733 20 57 E-mail: [email protected] www.ehl.icrc.org © ICRC, January 2009 Module 3 The law in action 3

EXPLORATIONS (7 sessions)

3A Identifying violations of IHL (one session) 4

3B From the perspective of combatants (two sessions) 15

3C Who is responsible for respecting IHL? (one session) 28

3D A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? (three sessions) 33 Module 3: The law in action

CONCEPTS Violation of IHL Civilian/combatant distinction Chains of consequences Illegal order

In all modules: Human dignity Obstacles to humanitarian behaviour Dilemmas Consequences Multiple perspectives

SKILLS PRACTISED Perspective taking Brainstorming Working in groups Dilemma analysis Identifying consequences

If you have limited time and are unable to work through all the explorations, we recommend that you follow at least the short pathway of explorations marked with this icon.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL MODULE 3: The law in action 3 Exploration 3A: Identifying violations of IHL 3A

In Module 2, students explored why rules are needed Using statements from people involved in armed to regulate armed conflict. They also learned about conflicts, Exploration 3A prompts students to identify the basic rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) violations of IHL and to reflect on the reasons given for and explored the consequences for victims when these those violations. Students trace the way in which one rules are violated. violation can set off a chain reaction and brainstorm In Module 3, students go on to consider why people ways to prevent or to limit such violations. violate IHL and who bears the responsibility for ensuring that the rules are respected.

OBJECTIVES

• to be able to identify violations of IHL Module 3: The law in action • to recognize examples of the way in which one violation leads to another

STUDENT 3A RESOURCES 3A.1 Voices from war – 2 3A.2 What are the basic rules of international humanitarian law? 3A.3 Worksheet: Which rule of IHL was violated?

PREPARATION Choose which passages (from “Voices from war – 2”) to use in steps 1 and 2. In the Methodology Guide, review teaching methods 1 (Discussion), 2 (Brainstorming), 5 (Role-playing), 7 (Writing and reflecting), 10 (Gathering stories and news) and the material on teaching about consequences in teaching method 4 (Using dilemmas). If possible, view the relevant chapter of the training film for teachers (Module 3).

TIME One 45-minute session

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 4 The exploration 3A

1. WHICH RULE OF IHL WAS VIOLATED? (15 minutes)

Divide the class into pairs of students, and assign two or three of the statements STUDENT from “Voices from war – 2” to each pair. 3A.1 RESOURCES Instruct the students to identify the various violations of IHL contained in each STUDENT statement, using “What are the basic rules of IHL?”. 3A.2 RESOURCES Ask them to record their answers in ‘Chart A’ on the worksheet, “Which rule of IHL STUDENT 3A.3 was violated?”. RESOURCES

Also, have students study the statements assigned to them and find the reasons that people give, or the reasons that they can imagine these people giving, for violating a Module 3: The law in action particular rule. Have the class then examine together what the various reasons or explanations given by people have in common. One way to do this might be to group similar-sounding explanations together, by category. NOTE [For example: for security, for military advantage, obeying unlawful orders from commanders, The worksheet provides the belief that civilians are aiding the enemy, because the other side did it, for revenge, out of an example using desperation or other emotions, lack of resources, because they did not know the law] statement #1.

2. HOW ONE VIOLATION LEADS TO ANOTHER (15 minutes) Ask the class to find statements that show a link between one violation, and another that is a consequence of it.

Have pairs of students discuss violations of IHL that lead to more violations and ask STUDENT them to fill in the appropriate columns in ‘Chart B’ on the worksheet. 3A.3 RESOURCES

Have students also indicate the rules of IHL that were violated. Why do soldiers attack [For example: when one side places a gun on the roof of a hospital, the other side attacks the civilians even when they hospital as a consequence; or one side’s killing a prisoner leading to the other side’s killing know it is wrong? They were prisoners in revenge; or a captor’s cruel treatment of a prisoner that might lead to the captor probably told something or then killing the prisoner or to other captors following his lead] promised something big. They have been stimulated Have students report on the chains of consequences that they have identified. to do more evil. So they do not think much. What I do not understand is what happened to their human minds. – a civilian victim of soldiers’ attack

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 5 The exploration 3A

3. CAN WE PREVENT VIOLATIONS OR LIMIT THEIR CONSEQUENCES? (10 minutes) As a young officer, when I Have the class choose one violation to work on as a group. Then have them had just finished the training brainstorm ways to prevent that violation or to limit its consequences. course for officers I was When a list has been developed, have students evaluate their suggestions. walking down a street. It was a holiday. We were Possible questions: five soldiers just looking around to see if everything > What consequences is each suggestion likely to have? What, in turn, would each of was cool. And then in a those consequences lead to? matter of minutes we were > Do you think that governments and those fighting would accept your suggestions? surrounded by maybe four or five thousand people who Why or why not? How would you ensure their implementation? started throwing stones. They [For example: giving orders, training, monitoring, disciplining, punishing, making laws] were all very angry because someone had got hurt in a Module 3: The law in action refugee camp. It was truly a danger to our lives because everyone was excited, and I had to think about how to get my soldiers out of there. I only had my gun and real bullets and I had to get my soldiers out of there so I shot, I shot only at people’s legs, but I shot ten, twelve times, to get myself out of there, and I got out of it. – a commander serving in an occupied area

4. CLOSE (5 minutes) Discuss: > Can you think of examples from the news of situations of escalating violence?

! KEY IDEAS • Violations of IHL often set off a chain reaction, leading to further violations. • People give various reasons for the violations of IHL that take place. • There are several ways to prevent violations of IHL and to limit their consequences.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 6 Extension activities 3A

COMMUNICATION Write a paper about the violation of international humanitarian law (IHL) that your class chose to work on as a group. In your paper evaluate some of the suggestions made by your class to prevent such violations or to limit their consequences. OR Make drawings to illustrate the violation. OR Make posters to promote the suggestions made by your class.

CHAINS OF CONSEQUENCES Module 3: The law in action Select a violation of IHL and make a diagram of the chains of consequences that the violation could create. Some consequences might result in many other chains of consequences.

Initial violation

Example from “Voices from war – 2”: There are a lot of situations when soldiers changed uniforms for ordinary suits...

the other civilians are side also cannot targeted as targets distinguish combatants civilians between combatants and civilians

soldiers are disguised in civilian clothes

suspicion that medical and other disguises humanitarian sta may be used become suspected of being humanitarian combatants work is interrupted or stopped

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 7 Extension activities 3A

DEBATE The law sets up dykes Conduct a debate on the following statement: against the incoming tide. And the tide never A law that is often broken is better than no law at all. goes out for long. It exerts pressure, it threatens, it breaks through at the first Assemble two teams – one to argue in favour of the statement and one to argue opportunity. Sometimes, against it – and a team of judges. Teams should review their class notes and other it sweeps away the dyke. useful resources, such as books, periodicals and the news (newspapers, radio, And there stands our law, violated and ineffective. television). Each team should prepare the following: That is its fate. Anyone • a five-minute presentation; who thinks that the only • a list of points that they think the other team will make against their position; true law is one which is Module 3: The law in action • their responses to those points. fully respected must be living in another world. [The following ideas might be of help: the effect of often disrespecting laws, examples – Denys de Béchillon, of laws other than IHL that are often broken yet valued, the history of the acceptance of professor laws over time, the value of a law as an ideal, the alternatives to law] During the time allotted for planning, a third judging team should work out the criteria for judging the debate. Conduct the debate. At the conclusion of the debate, the judges should summarize the points they have heard. Then they should announce their decision and give reasons for it. Then, discuss the following questions: > How do you think your debate applies to IHL? > Are there other examples of rules that are valued even though they are often broken? [For example: religious laws, social customs] OR Debate the pros and cons of this statement by a teacher in Nigeria:

Since there is a law that forbids the army from killing civilians, there should be a law that forbids civilians from helping the army.

While preparing your positions, consider the following points: • the consequences of your position; • how to define what constitutes ‘helping’ soldiers.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 8 STUDENT 3A.1 RESOURCE (1/2) S.3A Module 3: The law in action

During the war, the commander commander the war, the During this: like code, moral our defined But, crops.’ people’s the harm ‘Never changed. on, the situation later main the fighting, the During policy the destruction of became the soldiers were the economy; could they if that order an given they had big things, not achieve property. attack the people’s to ashes, to burning all, Destroying the fighting in objective the was enemy. combatant – a former is just part sites Attacking religious feel that these Combatants of war. and use areas sacred are areas I am telling hide for shelter. them to any is not a church a church you, some soldiers in it. are if there more – a soldier

8 7

Soldiers kill felt that they had to a be excess He would prisoner of war. bring to have you because baggage wherever along a prisoner of war for responsible are You go. you get rid of thethat person, so to kill the person. you responsibility, – a NGO worker Another is lack of problem a whenever because planning, don’t you prisoner is captured, do with him. Asknow what to a soldiers killedresult, prisoners. detainee – a former not could forces federal The they the villages; therefore capture aid humanitarian any prevented is That the villages. getting to from hunger promote - to their strategy and starvation - and it is wrong. combatant – a former

4 5 6 There were a lot of situations in a lot of situations were There which soldiers changed uniforms you could for ordinary How suits. a civilian? So really if who was tell kill to have you attack a city, you moves. whatever – a soldier ended up attacking whole We doing us into What drove families. doing the that they were this was killing babies our people, same to months. as three as young combatant – a former some information that If I have killing the other people are my anybody prisoners, people who are the other side, from who’s I capture pay for it. he’ll – a commander People involved in recent wars wars in recent involved People of international describe violations they (IHL) that humanitarian law witnessed or experienced, have about. heard 1 2 3 Voices from war – 2 from Voices

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 9 STUDENT 3A.1 RESOURCE (2/2) S.3A Module 3: The law in action One reason why soldiers kill One why reason suffer civilians is that when troops what they do is heavy casualties, and dig come the civilians to call the graves for them. After graves the soldiers will been dug, have it was because shoot the civilians, responsible. their people who were soldiers who The It is done in anger. the less privileged ones, do that are not ones who are the illiterate about war. educated – a commander me a uniform and told gave They in the army. I was me that now come said that they would They if I didn’t back and kill parents my do as they said. child soldier – a former 16 17 Adapted from research conducted for conducted for research from Adapted Source: and from campaign War On People the ICRC’s the Use Stop to Coalition Soldiers,’ Young of ‘Voices of Child Soldiers (http://www.child-soldiers.org/ childsoldiers/voices-of-young-soldiers).

When my brother-in-law was a was When brother-in-law my the they did not treat prisoner of war, afraid are They properly. prisoners might prisoners the day some that is That them. to done was what tell murdered. were prisoners many why the misdeeds. conceal Simply to and manager teacher – a former camp of a refugee civilian the to water or food Denying is It war. in strategy a is population them to allow don’t good that you them to allow don’t you get food, them. weaken will It water. get combatant – a captured is a machine gun Imagine there it over. take need to and you there put civilians on the But the enemy taking from you prevent to roof it. Of attack a military you course object. And civilians get killed. – a journalist – a widow Destruction or historic of religious during Because war. partof is sites anything; about care don’t you war you anything destroy to want you win the war. to in order across come 12 14 15 13 The army should not use civilians army The But it has been as a living shield. often. For rather done in this war they put the machine gun example, of a or on top roof on the church big building in which civilians were threatened, were we Because living. at those buildings. fired we detainee – a former raped girls who were were There kids who do not they have and now is a crime that This fathers. have be resolved. will never resident – a township briefed that when we were We another, to one place from moved It was should poison the water. we survival of the fittest. part of war, that these people are told are You if they get hold of you, enemies, But most of the they will kill you. they may be trapped; people are from people moving just innocent people These another. to one place food; so it is wrong no hope, have poison them. to combatant – a former Voices from war – 2 from Voices 9 10 11

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 10 STUDENT 3A.2 RESOURCE (1/2) S.3A Certain categories of people of people Certain categories and objects must receive additional protection. Recruiting or using children under Recruiting or using children the age of 15 in armed conflict is prohibited. Medical personnel and facilities etc.) ambulances, clinics, (hospitals, personnel must as religious as well and protected. be respected personnel, Humanitarian relief must be supplies and operations and protected. respected propertyCultural must be and protected. respected health specific protection, The needs of women and assistance conflictby armed must be affected respected. SPECIFIC PROTECTION 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Module 3: The law in action The only legitimate objective objective only legitimate The of war is to weaken military forces. the enemy’s WEAPONS AND TACTICS WEAPONS AND The use of weapons that that use of weapons The cause unnecessary is suffering prohibited. hostages is prohibited. Taking Killing a surrendering or wounding is prohibited. enemy there that or threatening Ordering shall be no survivors is prohibited. be a civilian while to Pretending is prohibited. fighting objects Destroying necessary for the survival of civilians (foodstuffs, drinking farming areas, water is prohibited. etc.) installations, Attacking medical and religious personnel and objects lawfully crescent/ cross/red using the red crystalred emblem is prohibited. Misusing cross/red the red crystal emblem is crescent/red prohibited.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Civilians and combatants and combatants Civilians must hors de combat who are be and treated protected humanely. Murder, torture, and cruel torture, Murder, or treatment or degrading prohibited. are punishment is prohibited. Sexual violence of civilians is displacement Forced prohibited. Starving civilians is prohibited. protect human shields to Using military objectives is prohibited. shipwrecked or sick Wounded, searchedbe must combatants enemy There for. collected and cared for, treatment, should be no preferential on medical grounds. except civilians and enemy Captured adequate given be must combatants and shelter clothing, water, food, to and must be allowed medical care with their families. correspond a fair trial. must receive Everyone TREATMENT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

When planning or carrying out an attack, distinction must be made between civilians and combatants and civilian objectsbetween and military objectives. Attacking civilians is prohibited. Attacking civilian objects (houses, of places schools, hospitals, or historic cultural worship, is prohibited. etc.) monuments, an attack, everyBefore possible must be taken to precaution harm to the potential minimize civilians and civilian objects. are that use of weapons The distinguish between not able to civilians and military is targets prohibited. DISTINCTION 1. 2. 3. 4. hat are the basic rules of international W hat are humanitarian law?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 11 STUDENT 3A.2 RESOURCE (2/2) S.3A Module 3: The law in action D efinitions any person who is not a combatant civilian: any civilians take a direct partWhen from they lose their protection in fighting, he or she shall be status, attack. (When doubt about a person’s is any there be a civilian.) to considered civilian object: object is not a military any that objective When a civilian object is used in support of military action, it military (Whena legitimate and loses its protection. becomes target is any there doubt about whether a civilian object is in fact being used in supportmilitary be a civilian object.) to action, it shall be considered of under the member of an armed group member of armed forces, combatant: of a partyorders the conflict to purpose location, or use military objective: object its nature, which by military to contribution makes an effective action and whose destruction military a definite offers advantage hors de combat: literally means‘out of the fight’ and describes combatants and sick or shipwrecked or who are or wounded been captured who have fight no longer in a position to thus are principle of proportionality: the expected number of deaths or injuries compared civilian objects civilians or damage to to must not be excessive military the anticipated to advantage hat are the basic rules of international W hat are humanitarian law?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 12 STUDENT 3A.3 RESOURCE (1/2)

Worksheet S.3A Module 3: The law in action To be able to hide, to have food and shelter, out of fear, out of fear, food and shelter, have to hide, be able to To etc. of security, for reasons Reasons Weapons and Tactics 5 and Tactics Weapons Distinction 1 IHL violations Chart A Statement # Statement # Statement # Statement Example: #1 - Soldiers soldiers killed posed as civilians; the enemy Statement civilians. if they were even moved, whatever Describe the wrongful actionDescribe the wrongful W hich rule of I H L was violated?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 13 STUDENT 3A.3 RESOURCE (2/2)

Worksheet S.3A Distinction 1 5 and Tactics Weapons Module 3: The law in action including civilians. The other side might then The including civilians. attack civilians in revenge Name a violation that did (or could) follow did (or could) that Name a violation IHL violations Chart B Weapons and Tactics 5 and Tactics Weapons who moved, soldiers killed enemy anyone The IHL violations Example: #1 - Soldiers posed as civilians. Statement # Statement # Statement # Statement Write down one wrong thing that someone did thing that one wrong down Write W hich rule of I H L was violated?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3A: IDENTIFYING VIOLATIONS OF IHL 14 Exploration 3B: From the perspective of combatants3B

In Exploration 3A, students identified a number of difficult decisions, in applying the rules of war when violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) their own safety and the safety of their fellow combatants as well as the reasons for such violations, and then is at risk. Many such dilemmas arise when the distinction discussed how one violation can lead to others. between civilians and combatants – or between civilian In Exploration 3B, they tackle dilemmas based on the objects and military objectives – is unclear. This actual experiences of combatants in situations typical distinction has sometimes been blurred intentionally of modern warfare. Combatants are faced with by combatants seeking safety or advantage.

OBJECTIVES • to be able to recognize dilemmas that may arise in respecting IHL in combat situations

• to understand the difficulties in respecting IHL when the difference between combatants and civilians Module 3: The law in action is unclear

STUDENT 3B RESOURCES Dilemma scenarios: 3B.1 Now what do I do? 3B.2 Should I stop it? 3B.3 700 prisoners and little to live on 3B.4 What if she’s telling the truth?* 3B.5 Should the soldier open fire on the village?* 3B.6 Dilemma worksheet 3B.7 What are the basic rules of international humanitarian law?

PREPARATION Choose two or more dilemmas (from “Dilemma scenarios”) to use in steps 1 and 2. Be sure to include at least one of the dilemmas marked *, which deal with difficulties in distinguishing civilians from combatants. In the Methodology Guide, review teaching methods 1 (Discussion), 3 (“No easy answers”), 5 (Role-playing), 9 (Small groups), 10 (Gathering stories and news) and the material on teaching about consequences in teaching method 4 (Using dilemmas).

TIME Two 45-minute sessions

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 15 The exploration 3B

1. DILEMMAS THAT COMBATANTS MAY FACE (30 minutes)

Divide the class into small groups and assign each group a dilemma from STUDENT “Dilemma scenarios.” 3B.1-5 RESOURCES Each group can use copies of the “Dilemma worksheet” and of “What are the STUDENT basic rules of international humanitarian law?” to note down their ideas as they 3B.6 RESOURCES work on the dilemma and to stimulate discussions. STUDENT 3B.7 RESOURCES

As they work out what action to take in light of the dilemma presented, they should keep in mind the following points: Module 3: The law in action • the various options that are available; • the possible consequences of each action; • what IHL requires; • the different people involved and their points of view. In addition, encourage them to consider the following points: • how emotions and attitudes could influence consequences; • conditions that may affect the combatants’ choices (such as time pressures, the dangerousness of their surroundings and the degree of authority or influence that they have over the other people involved). After about 15 minutes, ask the groups to choose which action to take. Ask them to write down their choice and their reasons for it. In making their choice, they should take into account the rules of IHL as well as any other pertinent considerations.

2. DILEMMA DECISIONS (25 minutes) Reconvene the class, and have one student report each group’s decision. In their reports, students should be asked to: • state the problem they faced in trying to respect IHL in the situation they were given; • indicate the action they decided to take; • give reasons for their choice.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 16 The exploration 3B

3. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CIVILIANS AND COMBATANTS (30 minutes) I think the armed forces Ask students to reflect on the following rule: attacked civilians because they didn’t understand When planning or carrying out an attack, distinction must be made between civilians what it was like for civilians. Soldiers complained all the and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives. time that civilians were also – Paraphrased from Article 48, Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions guerrillas. Sometimes the soldiers thought that the Help students understand the rule by asking them to give examples of: people collaborated with the guerrillas. Sometimes • people who would be considered to be civilians in armed conflict; the soldiers thought that • things that would be considered to be civilian objects and things that would be some family perhaps gave considered to be military objectives. the guerrillas some food or had joined them, so they Module 3: The law in action Then discuss the following rule: killed the whole family for collaborating with the enemy. When there is any doubt about a person’s status, he or she shall be considered to be a – a woman with a civilian. Similarly, if there is any doubt about whether a civilian object is in fact being used ‘disappeared’ family in support of military action, it shall be considered to be a civilian object. member – Paraphrased from Articles 50 and 52, Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions

Use examples like the following to discuss how borderline cases contribute to dilemmas that soldiers face in respecting IHL: • a woman who provides food and shelter to soldiers; • a radio station that broadcasts war propaganda; • a university where some students are trained for military service.

Possible questions: > What are the consequences of not knowing who is a civilian or what is a civilian object? What consequences could such ignorance or doubt have? Explain to students that if a civilian is involved in acts that directly harm the enemy by weakening its military strength, that person looses his or her protection against attack, although only for the duration of the act in question. Make sure that students understand that even under such circumstances, civilians do not qualify as combatants.

4. CLOSE (5 minutes) One day people are running Discuss: up to you and hugging you, > How can combatants affect how civilians from their side are treated during and the next day a little kid armed conflict? is throwing a grenade at you. What are you supposed to decide from that? What are you supposed to feel? I don’t know. – a soldier

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 17 The exploration 3B

! KEY IDEAS • Following the rules of IHL in situations of armed conflict sometimes creates dilemmas. • Dilemmas may result from the difficulty of distinguishing between combatants and civilians. • Sometimes people blur the distinction intentionally, and sometimes it is blurred when fighting takes place in residential areas. • If there is any doubt about the civilian status of a person or an object, that person or object shall considered to be civilian. Module 3: The law in action

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 18 Extension activities 3B

HISTORY OF CIVILIAN INVOLVEMENT IN WARFARE In connection with your history studies, examine the role of civilians during wars. For instance: > How has guerrilla warfare affected civilians? > How have changes in military strategy and technological advances affected the status of civilians and the distinction that is drawn between them and combatants?

ROLE-PLAYING

Choose one of the dilemmas, and prepare a dramatization based on it. STUDENT

3B.1-5 RESOURCES Module 3: The law in action

In addition to the decision-maker, consider the roles listed under “Possible points of view to consider” or others you may think of.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 19 STUDENT 3B.1 RESOURCE

Dilemma scenario S.3B : Module 3: The law in action consider

view

points

P ossible • one of the soldiers in squad • enemy the wounded • superior officer the lieutenant’s • pilot the helicopter • soldier in hiding an enemy Question: As the lieutenant, what would you do? you would what Question: the lieutenant, As There was no way I could leave a leave I could no way was There on the man (...) out there wounded only were but (...) there die, plains to and with seven about fifteen of us, be in real would we watch, prisoners to if an attack started.trouble Evening had (...) (...) We too. approaching was and a basic weapons only individual had load of ammo [ammunition]. We tools eat, no entrenching to no rations dig in, and no air supportwith which to upon in an emergency. call to Once a Warrior King: a Warrior Once Donovan, David Source: Memories of an Officer Vietnam , McGraw-Hill, in 1985. York, New Now what do I do? of a small is in charge A lieutenant to has been ordered squad that from men and materials capture of small convoy a disabled enemy in and sees a His squad moves boats. His soldiers boats. of wrecked couple and shoot back. fire under light come out of hiding men come several Then along the canal bank and approach with their hands up. the lieutenant them. He captures an one of his squad drags Now A out of the canal. fighter enemy him open has sliced of shrapnel piece the abdomen. He is lying on across closed, with his eyes the ground Kneeling beside the softly. groaning himself, thinks to man, the lieutenant do I do?” what God! Now my “Oh one of his own for radio He could pick to come to medical helicopters is safe how but up, man wounded the in the area? remain his squad to it for left fighters the area the enemy Have in there they sitting just over or are the first jump at to waiting the trees, is fighter enemy The opportunity? badly hurt carrytoo the squad to for base. him back to

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 20 STUDENT 3B.2 RESOURCE

Dilemma scenario S.3B : Module 3: The law in action consider

view

points

P ossible • the prisoner • the soldier wielding knife • the sergeant • platoon other soldiers in the lieutenant’s • his military superiorsheadquarters back at Question: As the lieutenant, what would you do? you would what Question: the lieutenant, As Don’t cut him, o.k.? Just don’t cut him. Just don’t cut him, o.k.? Don’t him him back and count take can’t We So just cut him up. as a prisoner if you cut him put the knife up and don’t say he got the scratch can again. We the boat, but hauled him into when we cut him again! and don’t down calm man with the knife reluctantly The the and told stop to agreed just trying he was sergeant scare to the prisoner When the prisoner. knowing deny to continued the man pulled out his anything, the skin it into knife of and pressed chest. the prisoner’s Once a Warrior King: a Warrior Once Donovan, David Source: Memories of an Officer Vietnam, McGraw-Hill, in 1985. York, New Should I stop it? standing in chest- was lieutenant The man a suddenly when water high his side. at under the water burst from that at things two saw lieutenant The eyes man’s the in wildness the instant: in his hand. and the knife clutched struggle in the a desperate After got control the lieutenant water, arm and held it until of the man’s him and took men rescued his own The prisoner. fighter the enemy on the bank. collapsed lieutenant his noticed lieutenant the Later, captured the around huddled soldiers at him shouting were They fighter. a with him threatening was one and in charge, the officer As knife. combat check to over hurried lieutenant the By the time happening. was what had man captured the there, got he sergeant A chest. the across cut been tryingwas calm the situation: to

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 21 STUDENT 3B.3 RESOURCE

view

points

P ossible • other victorious soldiers • the prisoners Question: What should the captors do? should the captors What Question:

World War I, Beida Bordj camp. German German camp. Bordj Beida I, War World prisoners of war. 700 prisoners and little to live on diet, indulgence in which would bring bring would which in indulgence diet, immobilityfuture upon us. A successful battle fought in the fought battle A successful or home desert, a town far from A victorious last over. at was base, it. soldier remembers We us out of our trance. Hunger called prisoners in hundred seven had now men. hundred five own our to addition indeed, (or, money any not had We (...) been had meal last the and market); a we In our riding camels two days ago. weeks, six for enough meat possessed poor diet, and a [costly] but it was in the Desert, Revolt Lawrence, T.E. Source: 1927. York, New Company, H. Doran George

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 22 STUDENT 3B.4 RESOURCE

Dilemma scenario S.3B Module 3: The law in action : She claimed they were just fishing She claimed they were the bunker to and had run into the machine-gunescape from fire. as she looked her eyes from ran Tears she that swearing mine, directly into another Suddenly, innocent. was off inside of me. went switch her and woman this caught had We written was Guilt red-handed. friend be guilty! them – they had to all over Looking so sure. But suddenly I wasn’t roll tears the watching her, at down fear great a had I cheeks, her down the truth. telling she was that Once a Warrior King: a Warrior Once Donovan, David Source: Memories of an Officer Vietnam, McGraw-Hill, in 1985. York, New consider

view

points

P ossible • one of the prisoners • questioning them the sergeant • who posed as civilians a soldier whose friendkilled was combatants by • military the enemy headquarters leaders back at Question: As the lieutenant, what would you do? you would what Question: the lieutenant, As qualms I had had a few minutes before before minutes qualms I had a few the I said to worry”, “Don’t vanished. get the information.” “I’ll sergeant, our behind out man the took I his denials. He continued building. will you or talk will “You shouted, I So then and air the into shot a fired I die.” took I Then away. hidden him had rifle my out and pressed one woman and spoke, her forehead muzzle to the truth. tell to refused brother Your tell He lied and I killed him. Unless you Where are too. the truth, I will kill you friends? Where do they keep your their weapons? hat if she’s telling the truth? W hat if she’s we ceased, the firing When were We the bunker. surrounded We still in there. someone was sure A surrender. to them to shouted with out came women two and man Inside the bunker, their hands up. along men, dead two found we We and documents. with weapons the man and two that sure were combatants. also enemy were women us on fire opened had bunker Their now and men our of two killed and weapons with captured were they like still hot! My soldiers felt were that in officer the As return. in them killing our calming time hard a had I charge, get the prisoners safely to down guys our base. back to from sergeant my stop I had to Later, abusing them during questioning. about the know you anything “Don’t back He glared I yelled. rules of war?” just trying“I was shake the to me. at “They just he said. truth out of her”, us one keep lying and not giving need.” we that of information piece needed We right. was he that knew I they them, and once from information the to the prison camp, off sent were opportunity be gone. get it would to The their information. have had to We

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 23 STUDENT 3B.5 RESOURCE

Dilemma scenario S.3B Module 3: The law in action : consider

view

points

P ossible • soldiers in the area enemy • of the area inhabitants • other soldiers in the tank • superior officers the soldier’s Question: As a soldier hearing that, what would you do? you would what Question: a soldier hearing that, As Should the soldier open fire on the village? Should the soldier open fire of In a column the early morning, tanks and personnel carriers made on the heavily the road down its way outskirtspopulated One of the city. to stopped column the in tanks the of they had rushed assess the situation It to determine difficult was into. given happening outside, was what and the engine of the tank’s the roar A soldier of dust in the air. thick layer of the tank,ducked inside the turret this looks.” like the way “I don’t saying, he had that announced Another reportsjust heard of lots guerrilla Outside, hiding in the area. fighters darting positions people were into of village houses. among a cluster clearly armed but were were They not firing. Inside the tank, to someone shouted open fire. Nolan, W. Keith Birdwell, W. Dwight Source: 1967-68, Presidio, Miles A Hundred of Bad Road, 1985. San Francisco,

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 24 STUDENT 3B.6 RESOURCE

Dilemma worksheet S.3B Module 3: The law in action Reasons for choosing it:Reasons for not choosing it: Reasons for choosing it:Reasons for not choosing it: Reasons for choosing it:Reasons for not choosing it: Reasons for Reasons: Possible Action: Possible Action: Possible action took: The we Situation: Problem: Action: Possible

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 25 STUDENT 3B.7 RESOURCE (1/2) S.3B Certain categories of people of people Certain categories and objects must receive additional protection. Recruiting or using children under Recruiting or using children the age of 15 in armed conflict is prohibited. Medical personnel and facilities etc.) ambulances, clinics, (hospitals, personnel must as religious as well and protected. be respected personnel, Humanitarian relief must be supplies and operations and protected. respected propertyCultural must be and protected. respected health specific protection, The needs of women and assistance conflictby armed must be affected respected. SPECIFIC PROTECTION 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 26 STUDENT 3B.7 RESOURCE (2/2) S.3B Module 3: The law in action D efinitions any person who is not a combatant civilian: any civilians take a direct partWhen from they lose their protection in fighting, he or she shall be status, attack. (When doubt about a person’s is any there be a civilian.) to considered civilian object: object is not a military any that objective When a civilian object is used in support of military action, it military (Whena legitimate and loses its protection. becomes target is any there doubt about whether a civilian object is in fact being used in supportmilitary be a civilian object.) to action, it shall be considered of under the member of an armed group member of armed forces, combatant: of a partyorders the conflict to purpose location, or use military objective: object its nature, which by military to contribution makes an effective action and whose destruction military a definite offers advantage hors de combat: literally means‘out of the fight’ and describes combatants and sick or shipwrecked or who are or wounded been captured who have fight no longer in a position to thus are principle of proportionality: the expected number of deaths or injuries compared civilian objects civilians or damage to to must not be excessive military the anticipated to advantage hat are the basic rules of international W hat are humanitarian law?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3B: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMBATANTS 27 Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 3C

In Exploration 3A, students identified violations of In Exploration 3C, students explore the responsibilities international humanitarian law (IHL) and considered why of various people for making sure that IHL is respected. combatants violate the law and how one violation may lead to another. Exploration 3B focused on dilemmas, which included the difficulty in distinguishing between civilians and combatants – and between civilian objects and military objectives – on the battlefield.

OBJECTIVES • to understand who is responsible for making sure that the rules of IHL are respected • to identify how this responsibility is fulfilled Module 3: The law in action

STUDENT 3C RESOURCES 3C.1 Who is responsible for respecting IHL?

PREPARATION In the Methodology Guide, review teaching methods 1 (Discussion), 2 (Brainstorming), 7 (Writing and reflecting) and 9 (Small groups).

TIME One 45-minute session

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 28 The exploration 3C

1. ARE RULES ENOUGH? (5 minutes) Begin with brainstorming a list of ideas in response to the following question: > What would help combatants follow the rules? [For example: knowledge of the rules, training in the rules, commanders who do not give unlawful orders and who set a good example, logistical support for respecting the rules, knowledge that violations are prohibited and will be punished] Then, for each idea in the list, ask them to say who they think is responsible for providing it.

2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR RESPECTING THE RULES (30 minutes) Module 3: The law in action

Divide the class into three groups, and have students read and discuss “Who is STUDENT responsible for respecting IHL?”. 3C.1 RESOURCES

To help them, assign each group one of the following tasks: • List the responsibilities of commanding officers; • List the responsibilities of soldiers; • List the responsibilities of governments. Tell students to use the questions under each commanding officer’s statement to stimulate their discussions. Reconvene the class to report on the groups’ findings. Review the ideas they had before reading “Who is responsible for respecting IHL?”. Ask what they think now. You might draw upon the following summary of some key points made by these three commanding officers.

Commanding officer 1: Failure to uphold the basic principles of IHL would hurt our cause and have serious consequences. Key concepts means and ends, credibility of a cause, self-interest, public opinion, image

Commanding officer 2: We have to take into account all the humanitarian issues when we draw up our operational orders during a war. Key concepts military planning, prisoners, medical care for enemy wounded, compliance with the rules

Commanding officer 3: Commanders are responsible for seeing that the rules are obeyed, and that requires training and firm discipline. Key concepts implementation, responsibility, training, discipline

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 29 The exploration 3C

Ask students to share their views on the various discussion points brought up in the commanding officers’ statements.

Possible questions: > Can you think of ways in which these commanding officers’ ideas might be applied to people’s behaviour in civilian life? > Can you think of examples of good and bad leadership? > What if a soldier is given an order that violates IHL? The last one is a complex question that will be taken up in later activities. Nevertheless, make sure students know that such orders are unlawful and that soldiers have an obligation not to follow any order that violates IHL. Module 3: The law in action

3. CLOSE (10 minutes) Have students reflect on the following statements from commanders to generate a discussion:

Combat is a last resort. Without humanitarian law, there is no light in the tunnel.

Possible questions: > What does he mean by “no light in the tunnel”? Why does it matter?

If you allow your enemy to lose with dignity, they do not feel that they have to fight to the last man. That is what the rules are about.

Possible question: > How does allowing your enemy to lose with dignity contribute to the restoration of peace? Does this idea apply to quarrels or conflicts in everyday life? If so, how? If not, why not?

! KEY IDEAS • For IHL to be respected, many people have different responsibilities to fulfil; although a single person can violate IHL, it takes the combined efforts of government officials, commanding officers and individual soldiers to ensure that IHL is respected.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 30 Extension activities 3C

AN ESSAY Review what you have learned in Modules 2 and 3, and write a paragraph or essay in response to the following question: > Why do governments and those fighting agree to respect the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL)?

A COMBATANT’S HANDBOOK Create a small handbook containing some of the basic rules of IHL that you think combatants should carry with them. Illustrate it with simple drawings. Module 3: The law in action

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 31 STUDENT 3C.1 RESOURCE S.3C Module 3: The law in action 3 officer

What are his reasons for saying that training and firm discipline and firm discipline training that saying for his reasons are What needed? are important? officers of commanding is the behaviour Why ommanding C ) (Z imbabwe Questions: > > During war, the people who are responsible for seeing that the rules are for seeing that the rules are responsible the people who are During war, responsible for seeing that the rules are They the senior officers. are followed The ordinary firm discipline. and by training by observedare and respected, is high, and their discipline if their morale trained, correctly if they are soldiers, But, it is of life in war. that is a fact because they will kill civilians, is good – yes, wanton from turning into stops it that junior officers by exercised the control if they do do not understand the rules, officers commanding If your massacre. with and do not insist on soldiers maintaining standards not apply the rules, a like on the battlefield, nothing but a rabble have you those rules, to regard pack of wild animals. not ‘the best soldiers have It’s the best soldiers. have best The commanders and you the best soldiers in the world you give I can the best commanders.’ put a bloody fool with them and they’ll in a week.can But I can be a rabble put a very with useless soldiers and they will start good commander within a day. improving required to ensure that combatants and civilians alike are familiar with the rules of and civilians alike are combatants that ensure to required must also enactThey the training. the appropriate receive combatants IHL and that IHL. punish those who do violate of IHL and to violations prevent necessary to laws different three from officers commanding these of views the on Reflect continents. 2 officer

Why is it important that Why include officers commanding humanitarian requirements militaryin their plans for operations? some examples are What of such humanitarian requirements? ommanding C ) (J ordan When we go into battle there go into When we all theis a paper that contains have we And orders. operational to related aspects all include to That law in our orders. humanitarian for instance includes prisoners of war, to how to, them evacuate to where – them, from take them, what to treat and wounded, the evacuate to how all these things inso on. So have we orders. our operational Questions: > > 1 officer

) S alvador How could failure to uphold to failure could How cause? IHL hurt a fighter’s be acceptable ‘ends’ the Can not? are ‘means’ when the not? or why Why the goals of militaryCan by leaders be discredited actions? their soldiers’ ommanding (E l C We taught our troops to uphold uphold to troops our taught We took and principles basic these strict disciplinary against measures that knew We not. did who those hurt do so would to our failure any made If I, as commander, cause. obviously it would such a mistake, We serious consequences. have comply that all our troops insisted how with the rules no matter difficult the circumstances. Questions: > > > The primary responsibility for what goes on during armed conflict rests with with rests conflict armed during on goes what for responsibility primary The are doing the fighting. – those who officers and their commanding combatants the rules of international militaryrespect monitoring for The for is responsible also them. Governments punishing those who violate (IHL) and for humanitarian law areThey an important respected. play in making the rules of IHL are that role sure ho is responsible for respecting I H L? for respecting W ho is responsible

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3C: Who is responsible for respecting IHL? 32 Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 3D

Exploration 3C introduced the subject of respect for what went wrong and what went right in applying the international humanitarian law (IHL) during combat. rules of IHL in this particular case. They study the various Exploration 3D presents a historical instance of soldiers factors that may have played a part in the incident, the committing a series of serious violations of IHL. dilemmas the soldiers faced and their different Students examine this episode in the light of what they responses to them. have learned in the preceding explorations. They trace

OBJECTIVES • to learn about some of the factors that could lead to serious violations of IHL • to identify a range of dilemmas soldiers may face in making the ‘right’ choice on the battlefield

• to recognize the differing responsibilities of commanding officers and ordinary soldiers for violations of IHL Module 3: The law in action

STUDENT 3D RESOURCES 3D.1 Attack on My Lai – Background 3D.2 Profile cards 3D.3 Immediate chain of command at My Lai 3D.4 Pocket card 3D.5 What happened at My Lai 3D.6 Video and transcript: What we did at My Lai (18’) DVD 3D.7 What happened cards 3D.8 What should happen next? 3D.9 A letter to reveal the truth 3D.10 Dilemma scenario: There was no mercy

PREPARATION Prepare enough copies of the “Profile cards” and “What happened cards” so that each student has a pair of matching cards. In the Methodology Guide review teaching methods 1 (Discussion), 3 (“No easy answers”), 4 (Using dilemmas), 6 (Using stories, photos and videos), 7 (Writing and reflecting) and 10 (Gathering stories and news) and workshop 7 (“Using case studies: My Lai: What went wrong? What went right?”).

TIME Three 45-minute sessions

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 33 The exploration 3D

1. BEING THERE (15 minutes) Explain to students that this case study takes them back to 1968, to the thick of the war in Viet Nam.

Present “Attack on My Lai – Background,” and then conduct a discussion on it. STUDENT 3D.1 RESOURCES

Possible questions: > At this point, what do you know about the soldiers in Charlie Company? > What do you know about their assignment for the next day? > What might have been these soldiers’ thoughts and feelings as they listened to the Module 3: The law in action plans for the next day? Why?

Give every student one of the twelve “Profile cards” so that each of them can STUDENT learn something about one of the soldiers described and his feelings on the 3D.2 RESOURCES night of 15 March in 1968. (Use “Immediate chain of command at My Lai” to help STUDENT students understand the references in their “Profile cards.”) 3D.3 RESOURCES

2. HOW THE SOLDIERS PREPARED (30 minutes)

Ask students to think about the night before the attack from the perspective of STUDENT the soldiers on their “Profile cards.” 3D.2 RESOURCES

Give them time to explore their sense of the situation in which these soldiers found themselves and to write down their responses to the two questions at the end of their cards. Then have each student discuss his or her ideas with a partner who has the same “Profile card.” After about ten minutes, conduct a discussion on the soldiers’ thoughts on the night before the attack on My Lai.

Present the “Pocket card” that was given to all American soldiers in Viet Nam, STUDENT and discuss its content and purpose. 3D.4 RESOURCES

Possible questions: > How does this card relate to what soldiers will do the next day? > What other guidance do you think soldiers should have been given regarding their behaviour in combat?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 34 The exploration 3D

3. HOW THE SOLDIERS COPED (55 minutes)

Have students read “What happened at My Lai.” STUDENT Then present the video What we did at My Lai. 3D.5 RESOURCES STUDENT 3D.6 RESOURCES

The video shows what happened at My Lai through the recollections of eight of the soldiers who were involved. Students will learn about how these soldiers regarded civilians, the impact on them of the orders they were given, the loss of self-control and the choices that the soldiers made. They will also hear how the soldiers were trained for combat (accompanied by pictures of soldiers being trained some 30 years later). Module 3: The law in action After the viewing, explore what happened at My Lai and students’ reactions to it.

NOTE The video presents five themes. During each segment (theme), the participants reflect on what happened and their involvement in related events. (In the transcript, these five segments are marked by a row of dots.) 1. training, (voice of Hodges) 2. us, the enemy, and determining who the enemy is (Widmer, Bernhardt, Simpson) 3. loss of self-control, moral confusion, meaning of orders (Bernhardt, Hodges, Widmer) 4. choices soldiers made (Simpson, Widmer, Hodges, Stanley, Haeberle) 5. bystanders (Thompson, Colburn, Haeberle)

Discuss: • the enormity of the tragedy for the victims; • the soldiers’ state of mind prior to the operation on 16 March; • the factors influencing the soldiers’ behaviour; NOTE • the difficulties in distinguishing between combatants and civilians; If time allows, replay some • the responsibilities of commanding officers; segments for discussion. • the responsibilities of ordinary soldiers for their own actions; The transcript can be • how IHL and the instructions on the “Pocket card” relate to the operation at My Lai useful for reviewing what (its planning and its execution); the men said about their • the effect of the tragedy on the soldiers themselves. experiences at My Lai.

Distribute the “What happened cards.” Each student should receive the card that STUDENT matches the “Profile card” that he or she was given earlier. 3D.7 RESOURCES

Ask them to compare their answers to the questions on the “Profile cards” with what they now know from the video and the “What happened cards.”

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 35 The exploration 3D

Possible questions: There are only a few > Why do you think these soldiers did these terrible things? people who were in those [For example, lack of proper military training in IHL, perceptions of the enemy, obeying circumstances who had orders, prior experiences as victims, peer pressure, thinking that ‘the end justifies the the presence of mind means,’ the information they were given that My Lai was a Viet Cong (VC) stronghold, and the strength of their own character to see assuming that VC mingled with civilians] themselves through those > Why did some soldiers refuse to take part in the massacre? circumstances. Most didn’t > What difference, positive or negative, could a bystander make? – even people I knew. I > Why is obedience important while fighting a war? was stunned to discover > Should soldiers follow even unlawful orders? that they made the wrong choice. They have to live > What do you think soldiers should do when they are uncertain whether the enemy with it. So do I, so do we all. before them is a civilian or a combatant? – Ron Ridenhour, Module 3: The law in action > How might the soldiers have been affected by what they did at My Lai? Viet Nam veteran > How can tragedies like this one be prevented?

4. WHAT WENT WRONG? WHAT WENT RIGHT? (15 minutes) The most fundamental Have students tell the class what the soldiers on their cards did. Make a list of these problem we must address actions and display it where all can see. when dealing with any Then ask students to suggest which actions are examples of ‘what went right’ and war crime is the profound which represent ‘what went wrong.’ Mark the former with + signs and the latter with fear of death that soldiers experience. In order to signs. Have students give reasons for their opinions. – overcome fear during war, people tend to rely upon violence, which in turn degrades their morals and manifests itself as an outbreak of brutality. – Professor Yuki Tanaka, Hiroshima Peace Institute

5. WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN NEXT? (15 minutes)

Ask students to read “What should happen next?” and to think about what the STUDENT soldiers on their cards thought and felt on the night of 16 March 1968. Then have 3D.8 RESOURCES them write down their responses to the question on their “What happened cards.” STUDENT 3D.7 RESOURCES

Discuss: • what students wrote down; • what they think soldiers and commanding officers should do and why; • what they think about the responsibility of a soldier who follows unlawful orders; • what they think about the responsibility of a commanding officer who gives unlawful orders; • what they think about the responsibility of a commanding officer who knew or should have known that atrocities would be committed but failed to prevent them.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 36 The exploration 3D

6. CLOSE (5 minutes)

Present “A letter to reveal the truth,” and discuss the role of outsiders in STUDENT uncovering the truth and in determining who was responsible and for what. 3D.9 RESOURCES

Possible questions: Our generals, I obey > Who is responsible for reporting violations of IHL? when their command is > Why did Ron Ridenhour, a soldier who wasn’t even at My Lai, do what he did? righteous, but when evil, I shall not obey, and here, ! as in Troy, I shall show my KEY IDEAS nature free to fight my

• Distinguishing between civilians and military targets is fundamental enemy with honour. Module 3: The law in action in implementing IHL. – the Greek hero Achilles, in Euripides’s Iphigeneia • Commanders must not give, and ordinary soldiers must not obey, in Aulis unlawful orders. • Respecting and ensuring respect for IHL is the obligation of all those involved in fighting.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 37 Extension activities 3D

PSYCHOLOGY OF ATROCITIES Choose an incident from history. Read American psychiatrist William Gault’s analysis of the various perceptions and factors that may lead to the commission of atrocities, and then apply it to the incident you chose.

1. The enemy is everywhere (Overwrought soldiers see threats looming everywhere around them.) 2. The enemy is not human (Using derogatory terms for the enemy reflects this tendency to dehumanize them.) 3. No personal responsibility

(Being part of a unit and following orders can mean shared responsibility is no Module 3: The law in action one’s responsibility.) 4. Pressure to act (Combat units that not fight become restless especially when mines and snipers cause casualties. The frantic soldier is driven to mindless revenge.) 5. The urge to dominate in violent personalities (Brutal war suits the character of such men, where their actions are often admired and they gain leadership.) 6. Firepower (The lightweight M-16 shoots ten bullets a second. A terrified or angry soldier can just point his rifle in the enemy’s general direction and open up a torrent of destruction.) – William Gault, Some Remarks on Slaughter

WHO IS GUILTY? A DEBATE Prepare for and take part in a debate on the following proposition:

People who do not speak out when they know that a war crime has been committed are accomplices in the crime.

RESEARCH Find examples of atrocities that have been committed in your country, or by members of the armed forces of your country or by other armed groups. If such examples are not available, search for them in the history of another country. Write a report comparing what you have discovered with what happened at My Lai.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 38 Extension activities 3D

ENFORCEMENT DILEMMAS

With a partner or in a small group, work on the dilemma scenario “There was STUDENT no mercy.” 3D.10 RESOURCES

Complete Part A before reading Part B. Before making your decision, consider each point of view, the various kinds of pressure affecting the situation and the possible consequences – both immediate and long-term. Then read Part B, and respond to the question at the end.

DILEMMA: RESPONSIBILITY FOR ACTS COMMITTED UNDER PRESSURE OR ORDERS Module 3: The law in action Write about your experience, or exchange stories with a classmate about the following questions: > Have you ever been asked to do something you felt was wrong, but you did it anyway because you felt pressure? How did you feel afterwards, and what were the consequences of the actions taken? OR Find a news story where someone acted on orders from an authority, while knowing it was wrong to do so. Examine the chain of consequences from that event.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 39 STUDENT 3D.1 RESOURCE S.3D SOUTH i SEA CHINA Module 3: The law in action My La CHINA SOUTH VIET NAM NORTH VIET NAM CAMBODIA LAOS THAILAND In 1968

SEA ANDAMAN engage the VC’s 48th Battalion and to 48th Battalion VC’s engage the the village of My Lai. destroy MedinaExactly said on Capt. what has been the subject occasion that his He remembers of much debate. any “I did not give like this: words do with instructions to what as to in the village.” and children women this that Some of the soldiers agree Others convinced the case. was are kill them to Medinathat ordered everyone in the village. On 14 March 1968, a booby-trap killed killed booby-trap a 1968, March 14 On another blinded sergeant, popular a others. several soldier and wounded have must surely of revenge Feelings of evening the on high running been funeral the following when, March 15 service, officer of the commanding Ernest Medina, Capt. C Company, and talk pep a soldiers the gave mission. instructions the next day’s for conducting be would company The a large-scale to assault; their job was Attack on My Lai – Background arrived Company) (C Company Charlie was It 1967. December in Nam Viet in Quang Ngai Province, to assigned considered officials military US which Its (VC) stronghold. Cong Viet a be to including area, the rid to was mission of One VC. the of Lai, My of village the to VC was the by the tactics employed civilians. with mingle came 120 men of C Company The average Their America. all over from militaryTheir training 20. age was had included one hour of instruction Each on the rights of prisoners. card a Pocket also given soldier was instructions contained on the that “The enemy of prisoners: treatment Inmonths the three hands.” in your Nam, five Viet their arrival in since had been members of the company killed and 28 wounded.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 40 STUDENT 3D.2 RESOURCE (1/4) S.3D Module 3: The law in action

What might he be expecting see the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Lawrence Colburn Colburn Lawrence the age of 17 out of school at dropped Colburn he became door- later, A year join the army. to He served in the 123rd gunner on a helicopter. 1968, his job was On 16 March Battalion. Aviation as troops air support the ground provide to for the village of My Lai. they entered "

What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Lieutenant William Calley Calley William Lieutenant of Charlie officer the commanding was Calley Lt old and 24 years He was 1st Platoon. Company’s him as to referred the soldiers under his command His towards attitude a kid trying war.” “as play to a soldier who summed up by was Vietnamese the do something to “wanted men if Calley’s said that all right with him.” it was wrong, briefing like this: Medina’s Capt. He remembered Calley: He said it was completely essential that at no time [should] we lose our momentum of attack, because the two other companies that had had let the enemy before, the time in there assaulted behind him (...) which would disorganize him when he made the final assault. (...) So it was our job this these villages by neutralize go through, time to everything in them, not letting anyone destroying get in behind us... "

What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at What might he expect happen the might to What next day? Questions: > > P rofile

Michael Bernhardt who had one a 24-year-old was Bernhardt He jobs in the army. of the most dangerous of used a system enemy The ‘tunnel rat.’ a was a lot of material. move tunnels to underground these search needed to were rats’ ‘Tunnel booby-trapped. which were tunnels, Bernhardt voluntarily, enlisted had he Although had that authority questioning of way a had of fond also was He superiors. with run-ins caused in Congressmen US to complaint of letters writing with the US wrong was about what Washington he had become In January and February, Army. the men in Charlie he saw how disturbed by their captives. treating Company called be would that acts saw I When Bernhardt: began I them, done had else somebody if atrocities this that maybe (...) wrong think that maybe I was to think like I tried not to were. things really is the way it but together, values own my keep to tried I that. this that see to began I little, by Little easy. not was getting out of control. of men was group " Profile cards Profile

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 41 STUDENT 3D.2 RESOURCE (2/4) S.3D Module 3: The law in action What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Robert Maples Maples 19, a machine-gunner was Private in a quiet man who had He was Charlie Company. Nam. Viet out of curiosityjoined the army about " What might he expect happen the might to What next day? receives he if do will he think you do What reports of his men killing villagers? Questions: > > P rofile

Colonel Oran Henderson Henderson Oran Colonel in the 25 years Henderson had served over Col. Despite a general. become and hoped to army taken part having he never in active combat, of the 11th been put in charge had recently Infantry other infantry Brigade and three brigades combat in all). My his first Lai was (3,500 troops Koster, W. Major-Generaloperation. Samuel whom he reported, him and to who appointed I individual and, brave “A described him like this: he that sure I wasn’t leader. a fairly strong thought, of the people the most intelligent necessarily was On 16 March, the brigades.” I had commanding contact with the radio be in constant he would the base. his post at from operation " What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at What might he expect to do and see he expect do and see might to What the next day? Questions: > > P rofile

Sergeant Ron Haeberle Sergeant part of photographer, Sgt Haeberlean army was the operation cover a two-man in to sent team to job was team’s The newspaper. the army’s for that about the war and photos stories provide back in the United newspapers to be sent would He carried – the a rifle cameras and two States. camera, and his own the army issued by camera himself. for photos with which he took " Profile cards Profile

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 42 STUDENT 3D.2 RESOURCE (3/4) S.3D Module 3: The law in action What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Captain Ernest Medina Captain 32- Company, of Charlie officer commanding The Medina popular with his men. was year-old Capt. soldier who had joined the army a career He was the He addressed lying about his age. 16 by at on My the attack Lai. before on the night company had authorizationMedina: them that (...) we I also told buildings, the burn could they village, the destroy to destroy and they could the livestock destroy they could that wells the close could they that and crops, food the them that this I also told supplied the drinking water. Viet 48th the with even get to chance our be to was and mines placing Battalion that had been (...) Cong that ones the operations, of area our in booby-traps be our chance shooting at us (...) and this would were and them face and in go to and them with even get to them. with battle do " What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Harry Stanley an ammunition carrier was Stanley and grenade Harry and his eight launcher in Charlie Company. a up by had been brought and sisters brothers going in workingmother who believed hard, He on Sundays. church school and attending to and came to Vietnamese speak himself to taught know than those who had the language better the military. in it by been trained that believe had to children Stanley: mother’s All my what she believed. that’s because equal everybody’s " What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at What might he expect happen the might to What next day? Questions: > > P rofile

Sergeant Kenneth Hodges Kenneth Sergeant of the men Charlie proud Sgt Hodges was before whom he had helped train Company, he would a sergeant, Nam. As Viet to they went of them during the a small group command My at Lai. incident was that order the of understanding Hodges: The kill to everybody Someone was in the village. given and children, and women the meant that if asked because in the village,’ ‘everyone was the order women, the – village the in were that people those or they Cong Viet the old men – were the kids, not were They Cong. Viet the to sympathetic were and they the South army, sympathetic to Vietnamese not were They Americans. the to sympathetic weren’t effort. clear that nowas quite helping us in the war It in that village. be spared to one was " Profile cards Profile

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 43 STUDENT 3D.2 RESOURCE (4/4) S.3D Module 3: The law in action What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Fred Widmer Widmer Fred to was 16 March for assignment Widmer’s the morning Medina throughout Capt. accompany 16 March, Before in My operator. Lai as his radio Vietnamese spend time with had liked to Widmer villages. in the surrounding children would we country, the in first were we When Widmer: You’d highway. the down and up villages the to go You play with the kids duty. in between pulling guard would You pop. candy, – stuff them take always would pictures with them. GIs [ordinarytake soldiers] with When we meet a lot of people. got to You the kids. mostly it was started losing members of the company, got really never We snipers. and booby-traps through was who see could you where combat main a into actually shoot back. could and you shooting at you " What might he expect see the might to What next day? think he will do when do you What My Lai? facing villagers at Questions: > > P rofile

Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson Hugh Officer Warrant soldier who loved a career was Thompson 25, At In pilot. 1965, he had signed his job as a helicopter to help in the programme flight an army up for not attached was Nam. His helicopter Viet in war Aviation the 123rd but to Charlie Company to circle to which had been assigned Battalion, Viet be filled with the to believed an area above these small for plan was The 48th Battalion. Cong’s their drawing by the enemy locate to helicopters for a big US way to then get out of the and fire the air. from Cong Viet the attack gunship to " What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at What might he expect happen the might to What next day? Questions: > > P rofile

Varnado Simpson Varnado Nam to Viet to 22 when he went Simpson was serve as a soldier in Charlie Company. a rifleman specialist fourthSimpson: I was kill to but the reality of killing trained I was class. and pulling the training from someone is different VC were They no civilians. were us there To trigger. us To them civilians. call don’t You sympathizers. You alternatives. any have don’t VC. You they were VC and they got If they were do something. got to and kill turn around you. then they could away, life doing that work. risking your You’re " Profile cards Profile

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 44 STUDENT 3D.3 RESOURCE S.3D Module 3: The law in action What might he expect happen the might to What next day? What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at > Questions: > AVIATION P rofile

Fred Widmer Widmer Fred to was 16 March for assignment Widmer’s the morning Medina throughout Capt. accompany 16 March, Before in My operator. Lai as his radio Vietnamese spend time with had liked to Widmer villages. in the surrounding children would we country, the in first were we When Widmer: You’d highway. the down and up villages the to go You play with the kids duty. in between pulling guard would You pop. candy, – stuff them take always would pictures with them. GIs [ordinarytake soldiers] with When we meet a lot of people. got to You the kids. mostly it was started losing members of the company, got really never We snipers. and booby-traps through was who see could you where combat main a into actually shoot back. could and you shooting at you RD " BATTALION 123 What might he expect see the might to What next day? think he will do when do you What My Lai? facing villagers at PLATOON Questions: > > P rofile US ARMY VIET NAM

ST Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson Hugh Officer Warrant soldier who loved a career was Thompson 25, At In pilot. 1965, he had signed his job as a helicopter to help in the programme flight an army up for not attached was Nam. His helicopter Viet in war Aviation the 123rd but to Charlie Company to circle to which had been assigned Battalion, Viet be filled with the to believed an area above these small for plan was The 48th Battalion. Cong’s their drawing by the enemy locate to helicopters for a big US way to then get out of the and fire the air. from Cong Viet the attack gunship to 1 " INFANTRY BRIGADE INFANTRY Charlie Company Charlie TH Commanding Officer:Commanding Commanding Officer:Commanding Commanding Officer:Commanding Commanding Officer:Commanding AMERICAL DIVISION Captain Ernest MedinaCaptain Colonel Oran Henderson Oran Colonel Lieutenant William Calley William Lieutenant 11 Major-General Samuel W. Koster W. Major-General Samuel What do you think he will do when My Lai? facing villagers at What might he expect happen the might to What next day? Questions: > > P rofile

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 45 STUDENT 3D.4 RESOURCE S.3D Module 3: The law in action significant do not have of his personal effects that any Take military value. The enemy in your hands in your enemy The with the will comply you a member of the US MilitaryAs Forces, country which your of 1949 to Convention War of Geneva Prisoner Under these Conventions: adheres. can and will: You • Disarm prisoner. your him thoroughly. • Immediately search be silent. • Require him to other prisoners. him from • Segregate him carefully. • Guard commander. your by designated the place him to • Take cannot and must not: You prisoner. • Mistreat your him. or degrade • Humiliate • and available. if required • Refuse him medical treatment PRISONER HUMANELY. YOUR TREAT ALWAYS (MACV)Vietnam Card. Pocket Military Source: Command, Assistance Pocket card member each to one – DISTRIBUTION in Forces Armed States United the of Nam (September 1967) Viet

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 46 STUDENT 3D.5 RESOURCE S.3D Module 3: The law in action heavy fire from VC positions, they VC positions, from heavy fire the village. into lined up and moved he a spot where to Someone pointed A squad leader, Cong. Viet had seen a “Shoot him,” said, Mitchell, Sgt David and somebody did. the killingOnce had begun, it some of the While quickly. escalated kill to men refused unarmed and others joined in villagers, unresisting soldiers their fellow when they saw hours, In less than four doing so. 500 unarmed villagers over well and their village slaughtered were destroyed. completely As dawn broke on 16 March 1968, on 16 March broke dawn As the peppered assault helicopters with artilleryground to clear the fire carrying other helicopters for area By the time troop soldiers. Cong Viet any landed, helicopters (VC) in the vicinity had fighters soldiers of Charlie The left. probably encountered Company) (C Company no opposition on their arrival. some soldiers, the landing zone, At running Vietnamese of sight catching Then, on them. opened fire away, and expecting run into tense to W hat happened at My Lai

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 47 STUDENT 3D.6 RESOURCE (1/3)

Video transcript S.3D Michael Bernhardt soldiers When I saw American have acts that would committing if somebody atrocities else been called think that had done them, I began to – that maybe I wrong maybe I was life and all my had been naive just too things really maybe that this is the way that; I tried think like I tried not to were. but it together, values own my keep to I began to little, Little by not easy. was getting of men was see that this group out of control. Hodges Kenneth that understanding of the order The kill to everybody was in the given was meant that if asked Someone village. order the and children, and women the Because in the village.’ ‘everyone was in the villagethose people that were the old men – the kids, – the women, or they were themselves Cong Viet were were They Cong. the Viet sympathetic to Souththe to Vietnamesesympathetic not sympathetic to and they weren’t army us giving not were They Americans. the us helping not were they assistance; any whatsoever. effort war the in Module 3: The law in action Michael Bernhardt, former former Michael Bernhardt, Company – Charlie ‘tunnel rat’ were We no one else but us. was There alone. all place this and company this in of men that all came had a company We the same culture from one country, from 10,000 miles away dropped were and we because felt close that way – and we nobody feel close to. else to was there Widmer Fred startedWhen we losing members of the booby- mostly through it was company, got really never We and snipers. traps see could you where a combat into and you shooting at you who was actually shoot back,could one-on-one. the main problem. was Booby-traps Simpson Varnado but who yes, I had seen the enemy, they would Little kids, is the enemy? in the back when or stab you shoot you Who is the started away. you walk to distinguish between the I can’t enemy? all of – the good enemy and the bad, the reason That’s them look the same. like wasn’t so different. It was the war or Japanese over here Germans over the North all look They alike, and there. tell? you the South. So can how And all of those drills and different different and drills those of all And orders. by out carried are manoeuvres motivated. highly soldiers wanted We them of motivating way trainer’s The and response a command have to was ‘What say, He would the soldiers. from and get theis the spirit of bayonet?’ soldiers So kill!’ to Sergeant, kill, ‘To reply, He along these lines. motivated were readiness of state a into them drill would his through and talking his through of what the spirit was. teaching trained who sergeants the of one was I very I was the men of Charlie Company. out. turned they way the with pleased be very turned out to They good soldiers. radio former Widmer, Fred Company – Charlie operator we country, first in the were When we down and up villages the to go would in kids the with play You’d highway. the would You duty. guard pulling between You pop. candy, them stuff – take always with GIs them. with pictures take would meet a lot of people. got to You the kids. Onplans wereNarrator: 15 March, up for an attack on My Lai,drawn be the to Intelligence by believed battalion. Cong Viet a of headquarters main the mount to was Company Charlie anticipated. was battle fierce and attack attack on MyThe started Lai just a It was in the morning. after 7 o’clock all Intelligence, to According Saturday. market. gone to have civilians would be Viet still in the village would Anyone wrong. was But Intelligence Cong. rifleman Simpson, former Varnado Company – Charlie past; this is my life; this is my is my This And I keep future. this is my present; me that this is what I am. remind it to is what made me this way. This sergeant former Hodges, Kenneth Company – Charlie soldier civilian to from transition The is a very distinct and a very rigorous Soldiersall the taught are training. know about things that they need to being a good soldier in those very early in basic training. days and weeks how use weapons, to how taught are They taught are They kill. to weapons use to with weapons. march to How drill. to how W hat we did at My Lai

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 48 STUDENT 3D.6 RESOURCE (2/3)

Video transcript S.3D I feel that we carried out the orders out the orders carried I feel that we of – the orders fashion in a moral of killing the the village, destroying did I feel that we people in the village. standards. moral any not violate GI former Harry Stanley, Company – Charlie certain ordered Calley Lieutenant and I was shootpeople these people, to me and he told one of them. I refused, me court- have going to that he was martialled military [tried by tribunal] I told base camp. got back to when we mind at the time: on my him what was innocent shoot down me to ‘Ordering people – that is not an order; that is feel that And so I don’t me. to craziness to obey want that. And to if you I have court-martial do that. If you you me, with it.’ get away can just a terrible horrible, I felt that it was be going on, and American thing to a red- I’m I feel like doing this. boys of any just like boy blooded American I’m there. of the guys that were the rest talking – black about black or white it didn’t guys doing this, and white It just seemed like difference. any make a horrible thing. Module 3: The law in action I shot the boy, killed him. I’d like to to like killed him. I’d I shot the boy, because think of it as a mercy killing, done it in the have someone else would right. But it wasn’t end. Hodges Kenneth I had been soldier, As a professional and at carry to out the orders, taught mind my crossed no time had it ever carry to out an refuse disobey or to to superiors. my issued by that was order shoot, to If men had refused one of my have think what would to I shudder say to hard It’s been the repercussions. the At done. have what I would now been in serious have he would time, court- faced have He could trouble. martial; been shot on have he could of in face an order the spot for refusing At the of hostile fire. in face the enemy, was that there did not realize time we – at the time. no hostile fire carry able to I feel that these soldiers were (that orders the task, assigned the out women) killing kids, small killing meant were They soldiers. they were because that trained were they way; that trained either you it’s combat, get into when you that in were that people The enemy. the or old the kids, little the women, the – village the enemy. all considered men – were and shot the baby too. And I turned her her turned I And too. baby the shot and was face baby’s the that saw and over training The blanked. just I gone. half kill, to programming the me, to came and I just started killing. personally day in MyThat I was Lai for killingresponsible between 20 and the only one that I wasn’t 25 people. doing it, so did it. A lot of people were suit. I just lost all sense I just followed of direction, purpose; I just started I kill. I could killing kind any of way but after I know I had it in me, didn’t whole mind just my killed that child, start, you And once went. it is very easy part hardest on. The kill; keep is to to kill easy to it becomes kill, you but once the next one and the next one. this open don’t I if Even life. my is This – nightmares my in – it see I scrapbook, still there. open this book, it’s if I don’t even Widmer Fred most disturbing thing I saw was The – and this is what haunts one boy with his arm shot off, me – a boy half hanging on, and he just had a ‘What like, look bewildered in his face to hard It’s wrong?’ what’s did I do, comprehend. describe – he couldn’t Fred Widmer Fred were that we My understanding was one get into going to were going in, we to going were we hell of a fight, and got done, and when we kick some ass, be anybody left. going to wasn’t there Simpson Varnado Nam, I was Viet to 19 when I went I was a rifleman specialistwas fourth I class. but the reality of killing kill, to trained and training from someone is different pulling the trigger. do going to know that I was I didn’t and children that. I knew the women say that I was but for me to there, were know I was killgoing to them, I didn’t I do that until it happened. going to kill going to anyone. know I was didn’t I wasn’t kill to anyone. want I didn’t kill. up to raised running with her back from She was carrying was she but line, tree a a was it if know didn’t I something. woman,a knewI what. or was it weapon woman, a shoot to want didn’t I and shoot. So to an order given but I was weapon a had she that thinking I’m so I shot. When I turned herrunning, four about her shot I baby. a was it over, through went just bullets the and times, W hat we did at My Lai

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 49 STUDENT 3D.6 RESOURCE (3/3)

Video transcript S.3D Ron Haeberle a just capturing I was the time, At a at look you when But reaction. know and you on in life, later photograph dead – they that these people are now feeling eerie an of kind just is it – shot were You whole body. your that goes through this? prevented think back: I have Could this? prevented I have could How Module 3: The law in action people out of the bunker. The lieutenant lieutenant The bunker. the of out people with was knew he way only the that said grenades. hand Officer Thompson So when Warrant he was the aircraft, back to came get to desperate furious! And he was He told these people out of the bunker. the bunker to going over us that he was get them see if he could himself to a rifle think he took even out. I don’t us if the Americans with him. He told Vietnamese on these open fire to were getting them out of the while he was on fire should return that we bunker, the Americans. Thompson Hugh When chief and I did instructcrew my on our soldiers if open fire gunner to civilians, more on any they opened fire felt if have I would know how I don’t on them. opened fire have they would have But that particular day I wouldn’t thought. second it a given Hugh Thompson, former Aeroscout Aeroscout former Thompson, Hugh pilot helicopter going During the mission, as it was startedon, we seeing a lot of bodies. all those people add up – how It didn’t and getting killed and wounded were It fire. enemy any receiving weren’t we many too were there sense; make didn’t And the locations there. casualties do this, in – artillerythey were couldn’t bodies in places were there because hit. didn’t that artillery former Colburn, Lawrence door-gunner helicopter was Thompson Officer Warrant what civilians, these get to desperate this of out civilians, be to believed he He had a safe and into area. bunker trying do toseen that what he was to not was ground the on civilians the help our that convinced was He done. getting if people these kill would forces ground landed He first. them to get couldn’t he American the between in aircraft the people in and the Vietnamese forces aircraft the of out got He bunker. the with aircraft the of out get us had and and went He him. cover to weapons our asked He there. lieutenant the to talked get these he could how the lieutenant We all came from the same place and I the same place from all came We know that they all had the same values along the line. that I had somewhere you school, get it from If they didn’t just It’s a stranger! pick it up from could go and do something like But to simple. is just That me. to just immoral this! It’s it. about feel I the way US former Ron Haeberle, photographer Army I happenedof GIs upon a group One of the these people. surrounding he has a out, ‘Hey, GIs yelled American So they kind of all dispersed camera!’ and I up, just a little bit. And I came and a one girl is kind of frantic notice is tryingwoman the small protect to in front And an older woman child. and the other begging, is pleading, her blouse and buttoning person was holding a small baby. they I thought the photo. I took were going to question the people. I away, But just as soon as I walked my over around, I looked firing. heard I and I saw the people drop. shoulder, on walking. just kept W hat we did at My Lai

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 50 STUDENT 3D.7 RESOURCE (1/4) S.3D

Module 3: The law in action happened

Question: What do you think Lt Calley Calley think Lt do you What Question: and why? will do about the massacre W hat

Lieutenant William Calley Calley William Lieutenant to the soldiers in his platoon ordered Calley Lt some When up villagers and shoot them. round shoot he began to the order, of his men resisted them himself. We in Mykill beings. to Lai human weren’t Calley: We – I don’t by kill to ideology there that is carried were wasn’t of flesh, and I pieces blobs, know – pawns, to there men. I was intelligent in Mydestroy to Lai communism. destroy an intangible idea, to destroy enemy. the destroy and there in go to ordered was I was I mission the was That day. that job my was That men, of terms in think and down sit not did I given. same, the classified all were They children. and women with, dealt we that classification the was that and (...) I felt then and still do that soldiers. just as enemy orders the out carried I and directed, was I as acted I in doing so. and I do not feel wrong given that I was "

happened

Question:What do you think Colburn will and why? do about the massacre W hat

Lawrence Colburn Colburn Lawrence to Thompson, Hugh with his pilot, agreed Colburn to Vietnamese the evacuate to land the helicopter American they saw land, they could Before safety. soldiers killing the people whom they had been save. planning to near a bunker landed the helicopter Thompson of a group threatening the soldiers were where save to attempt to went Thompson While villagers. and the other helicopter Colburn the villagers, their machine- pointing him by gunner protected his told Thompson the American soldiers. guns at if the American soldiers shot at gunners that two on the fire to they were Vietnamese, the him or at he would. promised Colburn soldiers. "

happened

Question: What do you think Bernhardt think Bernhardt do you What Question: and why? will do about the massacre W hat

Michael Bernhardt I just told point-blank murder. ItBernhardt: was not doing it. I didn’t I’m them the hell with this, a lawful order. think this was Medina, his company Capt. that says Bernhardt knew did not Bernhardt that commander, participate My at Lai and was in the slaughter person. troublesome a potentially therefore Medina him the morning after came to the keep better you “Bernhardt, and said, massacre mouth shut about this.” your " W hat happened cards

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 51 STUDENT 3D.7 RESOURCE (2/4) S.3D

Module 3: The law in action happened

Question: Given his position of authority, his position of authority, Question: Given what do you think HendersonCol. will do next and why? W hat

Colonel Oran Henderson Henderson Oran Colonel messages in sending were pilots helicopter Because takingdescribing was what on the ground place Capt. Henderson ordered them, Col. below the village in afternoon to toMedina return to been had civilians many how exactly investigate killed. order. But Major-General that cancelled Koster Henderson assembled the men of Col. Instead, if and asked them as a group Charlie Company killing. indiscriminate in involved been had anyone reported his superiorsall of them that to He later of the men many However, sir.” “No, had replied, they what that testified since have there who were “No comment.” had said was, Henderson reported that Col. later, days Three no and that complete was his investigation Later, killingindiscriminate had taken place. being told he denied ever testimony, while giving killing wantonly large about his troops anything of civilians. groups "

happened

Question: What do you think Sgt do you What Question: Haeberle will do about the massacre and why? W hat

Sergeant Ron Haeberle Sergeant Haeberle began taking camera, his own Using As pictures of villagers who had been shot dead. four-year- a wounded photograph to he prepared rifle three lookingold who was his mother, for to and the child fell close range, out at shots rang himself Haeberle turned and found the ground. of an 18- or 19-year-old looking the eyes into back blankly. soldier who stared prevented I have Haeberle: I think back – Could this? And this is a prevented I have could this? How question that I still kind today. of ask myself "

happened

Question: What do you think Maples will do you What Question: and why? do about the massacre W hat

Robert Maples a into forced been had villagers dozen Several their for begging and sobbing them of many ditch, get to time was it that announced Calley Lt lives. shoot them; some of the men resisted. to ready Calley directly ordered Robert directly ordered Calley Maplesload his to and start but Maplesweapon refused. shooting, Maples, at his weapon then pointed Calley disobeying a direct shoot him for to threatening in and other soldiers stepped or three Two order. at the people in fired Calley sided with Maples. himself. the ditch W hat happened cards "

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 52 STUDENT 3D.7 RESOURCE (3/4) S.3D

Module 3: The law in action happened

Question:What do you think Simpson and why? will do about the massacre W hat

Varnado Simpson Varnado something hugging and fleeing woman a saw He an or gun a be might it that Fearing chest. her to lifeless Her fire. opened Simpson device, explosive her over He rolled the ground. to body dropped a carrying be might she that afraid cautiously, a dead baby. Underneath her was booby-trap. there, were children and women the knew Simpson: I didn’t I – them kill to going was I that say to me for but I didn’t do that until it happened. going to know I was kill to want I didn’t kill going to anyone. know I was of sense all lost just I kill. to up raised wasn’t I anyone. of kind any killing started just I purpose. or direction me. in it had I know didn’t I came. just It kill. could I way it just went. But after I killed that child, "

happened

Question: What do you think Capt. Medina think Capt. do you What Question: and why? will do about the massacre W hat

Captain Ernest Medina Captain Soldiers Medina reported shoot a seeing Capt. looking who was as a little boy for as well woman his mother among the dead. he himself killed that who estimates One soldier, right “He was said of Medina, civilians, 40 or more it? he stop didn’t Why when it happened. there have He could around. Medina just kept marching he wanted.” it anytime to put a stop "

happened

Question: What do you think Sgt Hodges think Sgt Hodges do you What Question: and why? will do about the massacre W hat

Sergeant Kenneth Hodges Kenneth Sergeant I had been soldier, Hodges: As a professional and at no time had carry to out the orders, taught to refuse disobey or to mind to my crossed it ever superiors. my issued by that was carry out an order shoot (...) he could to If men had refused one of my court-martial; faced have been shot have he could of the in face an order on the spot for refusing of hostile fire. in face enemy, carry able to out (...) orders I feel that they were that meant killing killing small kids, women, that trained were They soldiers. they were because or the either you it’s combat get into when you in that village (...) people The that were enemy. carried we that feel I enemy. the considered all were of orders The fashion. in a moral out the orders of killing the people in the the village, destroying and out our orders, carried village – I feel that we standards. moral any did not violate we " W hat happened cards

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 53 STUDENT 3D.7 RESOURCE (4/4) S.3D

Module 3: The law in action happened

Question:What do Thompsonyou think will do next and why? W hat

Hugh Thompson Thompson Hugh evacuate to landed his helicopter Thompson Calley He met Lt villagers who had been wounded. told Calley ensued. argument an and ground the on his mind to and helicopter his in back get to him crew his and Thompson air, the From business. own in on a group some American soldiers moving saw rescue them.to He decided of terrified villagers. his instructed and again helicopter his landed He American soldier who shoot any two-man to crew to save. was hoping on the villagers he opened fire open to crew, my instruct did I When Thompson: more if they opened up on any up on the Americans felt if they have I would know how civilians (...) I don’t But soldiers]. opened up on [our own have would second a it given have wouldn’t I day, particular that I guess. at that time, the enemy were They thought. reported headquartersThompson to during the day killing widespread seeing were crew his and he that Lai. My at civilians of "

happened

Question:What do you think Stanley will and why? do about the massacre W hat

Harry Stanley villagers shoot to Stanley ordered Calley Lt When refused. Stanley a ditch, into who had been herded be killing to no up that way, brought Stanley: I wasn’t do it. not going to I’m and children. women and stomach Stanley’s into rifle his thrust Calley wasn’t he that shouting him, kill to threatened He bluffing either. wasn’t Stanley said he bluffing. Calley:said to I just as soon go anyway. die here all going to are We women no killing ain’t I but – now and here right out children. and his actions. explained Stanley Later, me court- have going to me that he was told Lt Calley him I told martialled base camp. got back to when we Ordering me to mind at the time. on my what was not an order; that’s that’s people, innocent shoot down obey to feel that I have And so I don’t me. to craziness court-martial to want that. And if you then you me, was it that felt I it. with away get can you if – that do be going on. thing to just a terrible horrible, "

happened

Question:What do Widmeryou thinkwill and why? do about the massacre W hat

Fred Widmer Widmer Fred Medina came upon a little boy and Capt. Widmer whose or four of three arm had been shot off. the whole is what haunts me from This Widmer: off, shot arm his with boy a (...) there down ordeal bewildered this had just he and half hanging on (...) ‘What wrong?’ like look in his face did I do? What’s killed boy, the shot I – And comprehend. couldn’t He or less as a mercy think of it more to him – and I like in it done have would else someone because killing right. wasn’t it but end, the W hat happened cards "

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 54 STUDENT 3D.8 RESOURCE S.3D Module 3: The law in action

It of all military is the responsibility knowledge personnel having report crime or an act be a war to of an incident to it to thought as soon possible. officer their commanding will make every effort detect of war Personnel to the commission crimes and to report the essential facts to their commanding officer. report factscommanding their crimesto and essential the to crimes war will take all possible actions to discovering Persons and to of witnesses, the identities note to preserve evidence, and surroundings. the circumstances record • • Military MACV Source: 20-4. Directive • W hat should happen next?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 55 STUDENT 3D.9 RESOURCE S.3D Module 3: The law in action I said, ‘So why don’t we try we don’t ‘So why I said, get an going to plan? I’m my will do, I Andif going. investigation tell ‘You the truth?’ He said, tell you the truth.’ tell the truth, I’ll When he got out of the army in March March in army the of out got he When detailing letter a sent Ridenhour 1969, he had learned what about My Lai military leaders, the country’s to and the members of the US Congress States. of the United President He needed an eyewitness and He needed an eyewitness find able to was Mike Bernhardt. Ridenhour told when Bernhardt that he planned he got out of the army in the all the officers down track to responsible chain of command them. My Lai and assassinate for upset was Realizing Bernhardt that carryenough to out his threat, an alternative. Ridenhour offered I was determined to cause an cause to determined I was a I was of some kind. investigation do it, but to I had no idea how kid. was I knew the first thing I needed the facts. A letter to reveal the truth A letter to reveal Ron Ridenhour nearing he was the end of When Viet of duty tour his two-year in a 22-year-old Nam, Ron Ridenhour, the 11th gunner from helicopter Infantry My not at who was Brigade, of the massacre stories Lai, heard During the had taken place. that Nam, Viet of his time in remainder out people who had been he sought about information gather to there had taken place. what

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 56 STUDENT 3D.10 RESOURCE

Dilemma scenario S.3D : : Module 3: The law in action consider consider

to to

view view

of of

points points

P ossible P ossible • comrades soldier’s that • his captain • Russian soldier a surrendering • the German military courts • government own the diplomat’s • the Russian government • the German government • the letter the soldier who wrote • other soldiers on both sides Question: As that soldier, what would you do about this incident? you would what soldier, Question: that As do? you would what embassy, a neutral at Question: a diplomat As David & Charles, & Charles, David P.O.W., Richard Garrett, Source: 1981. London, ordered: ‘Theordered: die; so whole lot must men five heard, As I have fire.’ rapid went on our side and one officer these heart-rendingmad from cries. and the comrades But most of my as the unarmed and joked officers for mercy shrieked helpless Russians in being suffocated while they were and shot down. the swamps regiment, and name my give would I get me court- could but these words secrets. military divulging for martialled PART A: PART German a I, War World during 1914, In on advancing was battalion soldier’s Russian troops. surrendering of the thunder the terrible Above the heart- be heard could cannon ‘O cries of the Russians: rending But there O Prussians!’ Prussians! had Our captain no mercy. was B: PART neutral was States United the Because I War World in 1914, both sides it as an impartiallooked to nation victims of behalf on intercede to able above quoted words The of the war. by written letter a from taken were German the soldier to young that embassy in Berlin. His States United ended with these words:letter There was no mercy There

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 57 Sources S.3D

Telford Taylor, Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy, Quadrangle Books, Chicago, 1970. John Sack, William L. Calley, Lieutenant Calley: His Own Story, Viking Press, New York, 1971. Joseph Goldstein, Burke Marshall, Jack Swartz, The My Lai Massacre and its Cover-up: Beyond the Reach of Law? : The Peers Commission Report, Free Press, New York, 1976. Michael Bilton, Kevin Sim, Four Hours in My Lai, Penguin Books, New York, 1992. Richard Hammer, One Morning in the War: The Tragedy at Son My, Coward-McCann, New York, 1970. “My Lai: an American Tragedy,” Time, 5 December 1969, Vol. 94, No. 23 (http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,901621,00.html).

Robert Jay Lifton, Home from the War: Vietnam Veterans: Neither Victims nor Module 3: The law in action Executioners, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1973. “When War Becomes a Crime: The Case of My Lai ,” in Jerold M. Starr (ed.), The Lessons of Vietnam, Center for Social Studies Education, Pittsburgh PA, 1991 (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini. jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED337409&ERICExtSearch_ SearchType_0=eric_accno&accno=ED337409). “The Massacre at My Lai,” LIFE, 5 December 1969, Vol. 67, No. 23 (http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Vietnam/mylait01.htm). “Forgotten heroes of My Lai receive honors,” CNN Interactive, March 6, 1998 (http://www.cnn.com/US/9803/06/my.lai.ceremony/). Excerpts from Lt William Calley’s court martial testimony on “Famous American Trials: The My Lai Courts-Martial” (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm). FM 27-10, The Law of Land Warfare (http://faculty.ed.umuc.edu/~nstanton/FM27-10.htm). Letter written by Capt. Aubrey M. Daniel to President Nixon, April 1970; “An Introduction to the My Lai Courts-martial” by Doug Linder; Excerpt from the prosecution brief on command responsibility in United States v. Captain Ernest L. Medina; Biographies of key figures in My Lai courts-martials (and a number of other documents) (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm). Peers Report: Summary; Company C: Actions on 16 and 17 March 1968; Suppression and withholding of information; General findings and recommendations; Omissions and commissions of Col Oran K. Henderson; Omissions and commissions of Capt. Ernest L. Medina (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm). Court-martial testimony of Haeberle, Maples, Conti, Meadlo, Dr LaVerne, Calley, Medina, Latimer (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/MYL_calt.HTM). Summation of Aubrey Daniels for the Prosecution, The Court Martial of William L. Calley, Jr. (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/closingargument.html). Instructions from the Military Judge to the Court Members in United States vs. First Lieutenant William L. Calley, Jr. (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/ mylai/instructions.html). Homer Bigart, “Prosecution says that Medina ‘chose not to intervene’ at My Lai,” New York Times, 16 August 1971 (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/ NYTIMES.html).

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL Exploration 3D: A case study: My Lai – What went wrong? What went right? 58 Media page 3 Module 3: The law in action What rule is being implemented? What are the consequences? are What rule is being implemented? What these efforts? led to events What in the future? they have or might did these efforts have, consequences What to become aware of the ways in which international humanitarian law (IHL) is being humanitarian law in which international of the ways aware become to of the law violations applied and of effortsto prevent Find a news report that shows one of the rules IHL being applied. report a news shows that Find civilians] protecting enemy, for a wounded caring of prisoners, exchange example: [For > of IHL. violations efforts reportto prevent a news shows that Find speech or actions] a leader’s for combatants, IHL training example: [For > > OBJECTIVE • 1. AND 2. of human dignity think of instances makes you that area in your occurred that an incident Find such violations. and of effortsto stop being violated

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL MODULE 3: The law in action 59 Assessment 3

METHODS OF ASSESSMENT

ONGOING ASSESSMENT

Exploring Humanitarian Law (EHL) provides teachers with daily opportunities to find out what their students are learning and what misconceptions they might have. Active teaching methods, such as class discussion, small group work, brainstorming and role-playing all provide such opportunities. Take five minutes at the end of class to have students write down one- or two- sentence answers to the following questions: > What did you learn today? > What remaining questions do you have? Module 3: The law in action Read through their responses, and use them to build on students’ knowledge and clarify any misconceptions for the next lesson.

PORTFOLIO OF Student WORK

In each module, students are asked to carry out activities such as interviewing people, illustrating concepts with poems, plays or artwork and writing research papers on particular topics. Keep a folder or portfolio for each student, containing written work, artwork, interviews and news clippings that he or she has contributed in class. Periodically go over the student’s work with him or her to monitor progress in understanding international humanitarian law (IHL). Post samples of students’ work where all can see.

END-OF-MODULE QUESTIONS

After Module 3 is completed, you might want to devote the last class session to a written assessment of what students have learned. You could do this with one essay question (20-30 minutes) and two or three short-answer questions (10 minutes each).

Possible essay questions: > Why do people violate IHL? Include specific examples. > Describe a difficult choice that a soldier might have to make in a combat situation. What is the dilemma? What are the consequences?

Possible short-answer questions: > Give two examples of one violation leading to another. > What is the effect of not knowing who is a civilian? > What were two dilemmas facing the American soldiers at My Lai?

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL MODULE 3: The law in action 60 Assessment 3

You could ask students to formulate other questions in small groups and then select one of them as the essay question for the whole class. Or you could ask each student to propose a question and then answer it. (The student would be assessed on the quality of the question as well as on the answer.) Or you could select a quote from a newspaper article, a sidebar in the materials or another source and ask students to identify the main point being made in the quote and whether they agree or disagree with it.

CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT

An effective student response is one which: • uses concepts, such as bystander, combatant, dilemma or chain reaction and other terms in the EHL materials; Module 3: The law in action • gives concrete examples to back up points; • includes examples from a variety of sources, such as the news media, interviews, class discussion and outside reading. The above techniques are simply suggestions to help you assess your students’ work on the EHL materials. Feel free to adapt them to your needs.

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL MODULE 3: The law in action 61 Web resources 3

VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW • Grave breaches, International Committee of the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/57jp2a?opendocument)

RESPONSIBILITIES FOR RESPECTING INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW • Respecting and ensuring respect for international humanitarian law, International Committee of the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/section_ihl_state_ responsibility?opendocument) • Implementing international humanitarian law, International Committee of the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/57JNXN/$File/Implementing_IHL.pdf) Module 3: The law in action

INFORMATION ON THE EVENTS AT MY LAI • Famous American trials: The My Lai courts-martial 1970 (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm) • The Vietnam Center and Archive, Texas Tech University (http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu) • “My Lai: an American Tragedy,” Time (http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,901621,00.html) • “The Massacre at My Lai,” LIFE (http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Vietnam/mylait01.htm) • “Forgotten heroes of My Lai receive honors,” CNN Interactive (http://www.cnn.com/US/9803/06/my.lai.ceremony)

Exploring Humanitarian Law EHL MODULE 3: The law in action 62

0942/002 01.2009 1,500