From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Human shields black bus, 25 January 2003

Human shield action to Iraq was a group of people who travelled to Iraq to act as human shields with the purpose of preventing the U.S.-led coalition troops from bombing certain locations during the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

Chronology

Ken O'Keefe, founder of the action

In December 2002 Ken O'Keefe, an ex-US Marine and Gulf War veteran who had formally renounced his US citizenship posted a call to action for large numbers of western citizens to migrate to Iraq and deploy themselves as "Human Shields". ^[1] The action was ultimately named the TJP (Truth Justice Peace) Human Shield Action to Iraq. It was his position that protests and petitions had no chance of pre-venting the invasion and he reasoned that a large presence of western citizens, strategically placed in Iraq, at sites critical to the civilian population, was the only viable deterrent to the pre-planned war. The strategy of the action was based on the huge disparity between the way western lives and non-western lives are valued, thus he argued that thousands of Human Shields deployed to sites protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention would make the invasion politically untenable. O'Keefe was in the unique position of publicly acknowledging Saddam Hussein as a "violent dictator" and "mass-murderer" before he arrived in Saddam controlled Iraq, apparently he did this in an attempt to neutralize the inevitable accusations that the Human Shields were simply pawns of Saddam. Consequently he received no favor from the dictator, his influence within the action declined rapidly as he traveled to Iraq, and eventually he was deported days before the invasion. Before his deportation he repeatedly pointed to US and British support for Hussein during all of his worst crimes, ultimately he argued that it was the people of Iraq who would suffer most from war.^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]}

In January 2003 a group of dedicated anti-war activists joined O'Keefe in London and set out to carry out the plan as a new form of non-violent direct action. Acknowledging that traditional forms of protest were largely ineffective, on January 25, 2003 a group of 50 volunteers left London and headed for Baghdad with the intention of acting as human shields.^[12] The convoy travelled through Europe and Turkey by bus to pick up like-minded people along the way, totalling roughly 75 people.^[13] It has been estimated that 200 to 500 people eventually made their way into Iraq before the U.S. invasion in March.^[14][15]

As the buses crossed Europe picking up more shields en route, efforts were made to capitalize on the publicity and ensure that the human shield project was broadened. An office was set up in Amman and two more groups of shields flew from London to Iraq via Jordan. The week after the convoy’s departure there were over 60,000 hits on the human shield website and over 1,000 enquiries about becoming shields. Human shield organizations sprouted around the world in France, Italy, Spain, Slovenia, the United States, Australia, India, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina, New Zealand, Korea, and Japan.

Upon reaching Baghdad, a strategy was formed on the assumption that there would not be enough human shields to avert an invasion.^[16] This was to involve the voluntary deployment of activists to strategic locations throughout Baghdad, and possibly Basra, in an effort to avert the bombing of those locations. There was much internal debate about which locations were to be chosen.^[17]

Human shields greeted as they cross the border into Iraq, 15 February 2003

Eventually volunteers deployed to Al Daura Electrical Plant, Baghdad South Electrical Plant, 7 April Water Treatment Plant, Al Daura Water Treatment Plant, Tejio Food Silo, Al Daura Oil Refinery and Al Mamun Telecommunications Facility.^[18]

The need to work closely with the Iraqi government was not something many of shield volunteers felt comfortable with. Some felt that the list delivered by the officials compromised their autonomy. Others felt that they would rather be deployed in schools, hospitals, and orphanages. These shield volunteers left Iraq. The rest took up residence at the sites, a list of which was sent to the Joint Chiefs of Staff together with a request that they recognize their assertion that targeting these sites would be in violation of Article 54 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Convention. There was no response to the letters.

At its peak the total of shield volunteers in Baghdad numbered about 500, but the realization that the thousands needed to have a chance of stopping a blitz on Baghdad had not materialized, combined with the failure of the United Nations to forestall war, meant that bombing was imminent. Many of the shields chose to stay; many others chose to leave. Still others, like O’Keefe, were ordered out by the Iraqi government. One 21-year-old human shield, Tom Hurndall, left Baghdad for reasons of safety. He went to Palestine where he was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper while working with the International Solidarity Movement.

As war drew nearer, the media started to become more critical. The list of sites where the shields were to be deployed were frequently described as “military installations” and, while stories of shields leaving Iraq were widely reported, the fact that a substantial number remained and that new shields were joining them daily, was ignored. On March 3, BBC news ran a story on the double-decker buses leaving Baghdad, “filled with last disillusioned human shields.” In reality, there were total of 4 people on the buses and over 150 shields still in Baghdad. Approached with a story about shield volunteers taking up residence in a food storage facility, one journalist responded: “Human shields? We’re bored of them. Call me when one of them gets killed.”

None of the 80 shields who stayed in Baghdad throughout the war were killed or injured. None of the sites where they were residing were destroyed. They were afforded freedom of movement by the government and treated with great warmth by the Iraqi people, but largely ignored by the media. This impression that all the shields had fled not only undermined the effectiveness of the action, but also led to ridicule. Rather than being portrayed as brave and selfless, the shields were instead caricatured as naïve and cowardly peaceniks.

During their deployments a small group of volunteers led by Gordon Sloan of New Zealand took on the job of vetting sites to ensure they were not in close vicinity to military facilities. This was to be the cause of some conflict with their Iraqi host, Dr. Abdul Razak al-Hashimi, Saddam Hussein's spokesman during the first Gulf War, and head of the Friendship, Peace and Solidarity organisation which was hosting the activists, under the authority of the Baathist government.^[19]

With an invasion imminent, Hashimi became frustrated by Sloan's explorations, called a meeting, and asked the activists to deploy to sites or leave Iraq.^[20] Hashimi's meeting is said by some of the leading volunteers to have been a costly political mistake. It was the trigger of much anxiety among the volunteers^[21] and negative reporting in the media, including mis-reports that activists were being forced to deploy to military sites.^[22] It was also at this point that some of the British volunteers were to return to London along with the two double-decker red buses and their owner, which were originally meant to have left soon after arrival.^[15]

The paranoia that rose up around Hashimi's announcement and the reports that the buses were leaving Iraq slowed the influx of activists into Iraq, and caused some of those already there to leave Iraq, believing they had lost credibility through Hashimi's actions. The Iraqi authorities, on the other hand, saw Kenneth O'Keefe, Sloan, and other organisers as constantly challenging Hashimi's authority and being deliberately disruptive, and that some would-be shields were taking too long to deploy to sites. Five of the 'trouble makers' were then asked to leave the country.^[19]

Many activists stayed on, however, and continued to shield the chosen sites. It is claimed that eighty human shields stayed in the Baghdad area throughout the bombing campaign.^[22]

Analysis and effects of the human shields

Human shields meeting in Iraq, 1 March 2003, at the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, Iraq

On February 26, 2003, Senior CNN Pentagon Correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, commented that the "Pentagon says they will try to work around human shields" as long as they were not deployed to military sites.^[23] Of all the shielded sites, only one—arguably a legitimate target under the Geneva Conventions—was eventually bombed, the Al Mamun Telecommunications Facility, one day after the human shields pulled out of it.^[24]

Article 51 of the Geneva Conventions, "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Protocol 1)," appears to prohibit civilians such as human shields from being present, "to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations," however, Article 52 specifically prohibits attacking civilian infrastructure unless it is of military value, and Article 54 specifically prohibits attacking food and water equipment, unless it is of military value and does not cause civilians to starve or be forced to move.^[25]

For violating a U.S. prewar travel ban, human shields from the U.S. faced fines, loss of retirement benefits, and/or imprisonment.^[26] On the day after the departure of the human shield convoy, White House Chief of Staff, Andrew Card, released a statement condemning the action and Fox News reported that U.S. leaders were considering prosecuting U.S. human shields for war crimes.^[22]

Criticisms

The Human Shield Movement was criticised for what many saw as being an overt act of aiding Saddam Hussein’s regime. Charges of the shields being "dupes" and "useful idiots" for Saddam were widespread in the U.S. The human shields countered that while various governments around the globe carry out acts of aggression, the human shield action saw fit to defend against this one.

Human Rights Watch stated that "civilians acting as human shields, whether voluntary or not, contribute indirectly to the war capability of a state. Their actions do not pose a direct risk to opposing forces. Because they are not directly engaged in hostilities against an adversary, they retain their civilian immunity from attack." Human Rights Watch also noted that the use by a state of human shields, voluntary or not, is a violation of international law, citing Protocol I of the First Geneva Convention.^[27]

Jonah Goldberg claimed after a debate with O'Keefe, that "O'Keefe and his friends are objectively in favour of Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime because they believe he is uniquely worth defending with their bodies. They may be brave, I guess, but they're still idiots, and I'm sure Saddam is grateful for them".^[28]

Maria Ermanno, chairwoman of the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society, cited reports that Iraqi officials were arranging transportation, accommodations and news conferences for the human shields and that they were being used for propaganda purposes by Saddam Hussein. "To go down to Iraq and live and act there on the regime's expense, then you're supporting a terrible dictator. I think that method is entirely wrong," Ermanno told Swedish Radio.^[29]

The Iraqi regime was also criticised for encouraging and facilitating the human shield actions, since this was seen as violation of international law and Protocol I, article 20 of the Geneva Convention^{[citation needed]}.

See also

• Human shield
• Non-violent resistance
• Popular opposition to war on Iraq
• Protests against the 2003 Iraq war
• 2003 Invasion of Iraq
• Anti-war
• Peace movement

References

External links

• The Human Shield Movement The Contemporary Review, 2003, Stefan Simanowitz
• Human Shield Action to Iraq - official website
• Some interviews with Kenneth O'Keefe on global news networks such as CNN and Sky News
• Human shield protest in Iraq: Ask campaign leader, live interactive forum where members of the public put their questions to Kenneth O'Keefe - BBC Talking Point Forum (16 January 2003)
• Interview with Kenneth O'Keefe, part of the Voices of Iraq series - The Guardian (February 4, 2003)
• 'Human shield' protesters visit No 10 - The Guardian (January 22, 2003)
• U.S. cautions Iraq on human shields BBC News (16 January 2003)
• Fear as human shield faces jail BBC News (21 September 2003)
• Human shield fined over sanctions BBC News (11 August 2003)
• Putting Noncombatants at Risk: Saddam's Use of "Human Shields" - CIA (January 2003)
• A man from Norfolk who went to Iraq to act as a human shield is back, saying his mission was a success BBC News (18 April 2003)
• The sister of a Labour MP has vowed to remain as a human shield throughout the bombing of Iraq BBC News (19 March 2003)
• Gulf veteran recruits human shields - BBC News (22 January 2003)
• 'I'm an ex-marine recruiting human shields' BBC News (19 February 2003)
• 'Human shields' head for Iraq - (29 December 2002)
• First wave of volunteers prepare to set off for Baghdad - The Guardian (23 January 2003)
• Human shields speed to Baghdad BBC News (19 March 2003)
• Targeting Decisions Regarding Human Shields - Military Review (September/October 2004)
• Inside the deluded world of the 'human shields' Telegraph.co.uk (2 March 2003)

Anti-war topics Opposition to Military action in Iran · Iraq War · War in Afghanistan · War on Terrorism · Landmines · Vietnam War · Nuclear armament · World War II · World War I · Second Boer War · American Civil War · War of 1812 Agents of opposition Anti-war organizations · Conscientious objectors · Draft dodgers · Peace movement · Peace churches · Peace camp Related ideologies Anti-imperialism · Antimilitarism · Appeasement · Hippie · Nonviolence · Nonkilling · Pacificism · Pacifism · Satyagraha · Socialism · Soviet influence on the peace movement Peace punks Media Books · Films · Songs · Symbols