According to the Geneva Convention, occupation is one thing, but in practice it is another

Table of contents:

According to the Geneva Convention, occupation is one thing, but in practice it is another
According to the Geneva Convention, occupation is one thing, but in practice it is another
Anonim

Most people believe that occupation is the introduction of foreign troops into the territory of a sovereign state, all or part of it. Based on this perception, many politicians make loud statements, stirring up public opinion and simultaneously increasing their own popularity among voters. Ordinary citizens listen to them and draw their own conclusions. How true are they?

occupation is
occupation is

Geneva Convention

Each of the cases of the use of armed forces outside the country (any) can be classified according to international law, in particular the 1927 Geneva Convention. This international document gives a clear definition of what occupation is and how it differs, for example, from intervention or the actions of a peacekeeping contingent. The Convention specifies what actions foreign troops have the right to carry out in the occupied territories, and what they are forbidden to do. Of course, in the conditions of modern war, which, as a rule, is of a total nature, the rules of civilized behavior of the army are most often violated. The international agreement only points to the ideal course of action to which the commanders should strive if they wish to avoid criminal prosecution after the end of hostilities. Of course, in case of defeat. Winners, as everyone knows, are not judged.

Meaning of the word "occupation"

In Latin and other languages there are words "occupatio, occupation" and other derivatives with a similar sound and root. They mean "occupation", and in every sense of the Russian translation. They are engaged in some business, borrow money (borrow) and the territory too - they do not seize, but occupy. Based on this, according to the Geneva Convention, occupation is the temporary presence of foreign armed formations on the territory of a state. Since each aggressor at the time of the attack is tuned mainly to his eternal dominance, he does not consider himself an invader, finding justifications for his actions. If the military campaign is successful, the territory becomes an annexed part of the state that carried out its military seizure. Especially if the majority of its population does not object to this state of affairs. It should be noted that only the territory (or part of it) of the state with which the war is going on can be occupied.

what is occupation
what is occupation

What can the occupiers

Ordinary occupation is a temporary and often forced situation, so there is no need to rush to extend the jurisdiction of the country that carried it out to the territory under its control. If the movable property of a hostilestate or its material assets (cash, debt obligations, etc.) are necessary for the continuation of hostilities, then they are subject to confiscation.

It is possible to move the local population, but only if it is necessary to ensure their safety in a situation of predicted or upcoming hostilities.

Administrative control in the occupied territory is carried out by the occupation command. Criminal law remains the same, with the exception of those articles that are contrary to the norms of the state that carried out the occupation.

You can be forced to work only in order to ensure normal conditions for the life of the population, or if the armed forces that carried out the occupation need it. This is the most ambiguous clause of the convention, allowing for a very free interpretation, although there is a clarifying clause. The local population should not work on the construction of defense structures.

the meaning of the word occupation
the meaning of the word occupation

What occupiers shouldn't do

If we compare the provisions of the Geneva Convention with the actual implementation of its articles during military conflicts that occurred in the 20th and 21st centuries, one can only be surprised at the unfortunate fact that none of them passed without numerous fundamental and gross violations.

Forcing the local population to issue information of a defensive nature is prohibited. Life, honour, he alth, property and the right to worship are inviolable. No one can be forced to fight against their compatriots.

Destroy,it is also impossible to destroy or harm buildings, forests, farmlands, monuments of culture, art, institutions of science and education, church institutions. Stealing the population (deporting) to the territory of their state is also strictly prohibited by the Geneva Convention.

You must not interfere with the work of the local judiciary.

That's what occupation is in the civilized sense of the word. So far, no one has seen her like this…

Recommended: