Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE RECENT EVENTS in the Ukraine town of Bucha have stopped the world in its tracks. Reporters who visited the suburb of Kyiv which was under Russian control until recently have described seeing the bodies of civilians scattered throughout the streets.
Images of the dead are there for us to see today, many with hands tied behind their backs, reports too that some children and elderly are among them, the accusation being they were all murdered by Putin’s soldiers. Bucha has also fueled concerns that similar crimes may also have been perpetrated against innocent civilians elsewhere in Ukraine as the war rages on.
The bloodied streets of Bucha have placed the attention of the international community on the issue of war crimes and whether this requires investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC). For this to happen we need to be clear on the type of atrocity that took place. Was the event genocide, a crime against humanity or a war crime?
These crimes can be defined as follows, according to the UN:
Genocide: The intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group by killing members of the group, inflicting conditions to bring about their demise, forcibly transferring children from one group to another.
Crimes against humanity: Any acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, including murder, enslavement, deportation, rape and torture.
War Crimes: A violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility, such as intentionally killing civilians.
Today, US President Joe Biden has called for a “war crimes trial” over events in Bucha and while visiting the scene, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused Russia of war crimes that would be “recognised by the world as genocide”. I believe whatever happened in Bucha might be termed, it was unacceptable and requires a full investigation.
Civilian vs military losses
The nature of warfare has changed in a century. It may be interesting to note that in WWI 90% of casualties were soldiers. By WWII, soldiers made up about 60% – now, it is civilians who make up more than 80% of casualties (mainly in intra-state conflicts).
During the war in Bosnia in the 1990s, Serbs in Sarajevo erected military positions within civilian neighbourhoods, close to UN positions and even took UN officers hostage and handcuffed them to Serb defence positions, daring the opposition to fire.
The horrendous crimes perpetrated by Serbian forces in Srebrenica in 1995 – where more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were murdered over a two week period – are by now well documented.
Based on the information we have so far from Ukraine, there appear to be differences between Srebrenica and Bucha. In the case of the former, there was a UN presence in the enclave. There is video evidence of convoys of trucks carrying away many of the victims and we had Serbian forces commander, General Ratko Mladic boasting that he would protect the population.
In Bucha, to date, we have images of bodies strewn along the streets wearing civilian attire. This may not be the complete picture, however, it is enough to launch an investigation and one that must be meticulous.
Holding Putin accountable
The history of Russian brutality is not confined to Ukraine. One only has to look back at the dreadful killings in Afghanistan, Chechnya and the Second World War for stories of brutal warfare. In recent years, Putin’s forces have also been accused of committing war crimes in Syria.
As described by Jack Watling of RUSI (Royal United Services Institute) on BBC Radio Four “This is a doctrine of anti-partisan warfare, which is about collective punishment”. This is what we have possibly witnessed in Bucha, Putin wants to punish Ukrainian civilians for standing up to this invasion.
This crimes in Bucha are not the only such incident of the Ukrainian war. The shelling of apartments all over the country, the destruction of much of the city of Mariupol, the confinement of a large percentage of its citizens, and the systematic shelling of civilian targets all add to the belief that Russia wants to destroy the soul of Ukraine.
There are many challenges for the ICC to overcome. Neither Russia nor Ukraine are party to the Rome Statute that established the ICC in The Hague.
Ukraine cannot refer any alleged crimes itself but the ICC does have jurisdiction over crimes committed on its territory. Russia withdrew from the ICC in 2016 after a report published by the court classifying the Russian annexation of Crimea as an occupation.
If a state is not a party to the ICC, its individuals cannot be prosecuted by the court for this specific offence. The only exception is that the UN Security Council can refer a non-party to the ICC but as Russia holds a veto as a permanent member of the council, I cannot see this happening.
Criminal investigations of this type and size take an inordinate period of time to investigate. It is particularly difficult in this case when it comes to investigating Bucha as the area is an active war zone. That will mean limited access not only to the area but in relation to the gathering of evidence, and listening to witnesses and victims – a major challenge in itself.
The ICC will have to gather the evidence necessary to assess if there are grounds to believe that crimes have taken place and who is culpable. It is very difficult to link a political leader to offences committed by armed forces on the ground.
Then there is the obstacle of arresting Putin (if that course of action is declared in a ruling). The ICC cannot hold court without the accused being in attendance. For this to happen I suspect he would have to be removed from office and extradited by a new government to The Hague.
Regardless of the perceived difficulties in pursuing this issue the international community should proceed with an immediate investigation of these war crimes to bring the perpetrators to account. The people of Ukraine deserve no less.
Colm Doyle is a retired Irish officer. He was a battalion commander in Lebanon and a Commandant of the Military College. He served abroad with the UN in Cyprus, Lebanon and the Middle East. He served with the EU in Bosnia in 1991/92 in 2004 was appointed Chief of Staff of the Military Division at UN HQ in New York. He testified at four trials at the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague. He is the author of a memoir of his time in Bosnia “Witness to War Crimes: the Memoir of a Peacekeeper in Bosnia.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
He seeks the complete erasure of Ukraine as a country and an identity. As they said on Russian state news yesterday:
“Denazification is inevitably also deukrainisation – a rejection of the large-scale artificial inflation of the ethnic element of self-identification of the population of the territories of the historical Malorossiya and Novorossiya begun by the Soviet authorities”
Ukraine will cease to exist by Putin’s hand unless the world intervenes. Mariupol is the blueprint.
@Rochelle: are you suggesting nazis have a place in European society?
@David Crosbie: how is the dementia these days
@Billybutcher: it’s fine, how is your delusional outlook on life?
@David Crosbie:
The Ukrainian “nazi” party, Svboda, won only 1 single seat in the Ukrainian parliament. That’s 1 out of 450 seats. There’s far more communist representation in the Ukrainian parliament than “nazi”"representation.
Svboda are about as relevant to Ukrainian politics as the Irish National Party are to Irish politics, that is, a few fringe cranks.
Now go away with your nonsense Russian disinformation, or will you start rambling about the Azov Regiment (Who have Georgians, Syrians, Muslims, Jews, and various other non-Aryans in their ranks)?
@David Crosbie: What Nazis are you talking about?
I’m not sure that’s what it shows, not am I sure this is the right way to go about things now.
I think there’s a good possibility the crimes were committed by a frustrated young battalion of conscripts who not only saw their mission fail, but possibly went through some harrowing stuff themselves as they were under attack and their tanks were on fire – I’m thinking about stuff like watching your friends burn alive – and took revenge on the civilian population.
Now, that is a war crime and then some, and it should be thoroughly investigated, and those responsible should be held to account. To do so, one goes up the chain of command, which could end up at some commander, or maybe even all the way up to the head of state.
What I think is a mistake, and possibly a serious mistake, is to draw this conclusion before the investigation, and call for Putin to face a war crimes tribunal, as Biden and others have done. If it is the case that we are dealing with an increasingly radicalised Kremlin, then to do so will only radicalise them further.
I thought it was a basic tenet of war time diplomacy to leave the drawbridge down for the other guy to retreat across, and not to blow it up. What I do not think you want to be doing is to end up with a Kremlin that feels they’ve nothing left to lose.
@Mick Tobin: “I think there’s a good possibility the crimes were committed by a frustrated young battalion of conscripts who not only saw their mission fail”
Trying to justify the murder of civilians and rape of young girls, are you?
There is no justification for what Russia has done. They are the aggressors. It was them who decided to invade Ukraine. Ukraine has every right to defend itself and Russian soldiers have zero right to do what they have done to civilians.
@Mick Tobin: l saw a documentary about Putin, some of the contributors claim he’s extremely dangerous when backed into a corner – especially if not left to loss ! N.u.k.e
@James Lough: nothing *
@Seán Ó Briain: It’s not my fault if you are not aware of the distinction between explanation and justification. I’m not justifying anything. All I’m doing is offering an alternative possibility where the crime isn’t initiated in the Kremlin but in a battalion – even if it was the Kremlin that went to war in the first place. And I think the investigation should proceed meticulously as such investigations should – up the chain of command – without jumping to conclusions.
@Seán Ó Briain: have you got evidence?
@Mick Tobin: Some people still don’t get it and just want to appease the murderous dictator in the hopes that they won’t escalate to a point of people like them being dragged into it.
@David Crosbie: There’s ample evidence. Take off your horse-blinders.
@Seán Ó Briain: provide it then
@Mick Tobin: They took civilians prisoner, tied their arms behind their backs and executed them. This is not a spontaneous act born out of frustration or anger. They did not just spray a street with bullets, they did that too. It was calculated and deliberate killing of an ethic group, a genocide (the intentional destruction of a people — usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group — in whole or IN PART).
I could post an album of photos, but last time I did that my post was deleted, the photos are likely too graphic to share here. Some were shot in the head, some point bank in the chest. They found more corpses dumped down drains and bomb shelters, photojournalists photographed only a portion of those executed.
Also, this was likely perpetrated by 31st Guards Air Assault Brigade and/or the 11th Guards Air Assault Brigade, Russia’s elite airborne troops, not ill disciplined conscripts. Bucha is next to Antonov Airport (Hostamel) where the Air Assault Brigade troops landed on the first days of the invasion. They then tried fighting their way to Kyiv but were beaten back. Some of their destroyed light armour tanks and vehicles (light enough to carry on planes) are in Bucha.
@David Jordan: OK David, thank you, but even then: what indications are there that this had been ordered by the Kremlin? Even if this brigade is, as you put it, disciplined, is it not possible that we could still be talking about an act of revenge, or even a calculated punishment initiated by that brigade, for failing to achieve the strategic goal of advancing onto Kyiv? Because that’s what is immediately assumed by many – that all this comes straight from the top of the chain of command (Putin). And it is that which I am mostly questioning, so what are your thoughts on that?
@Mick Tobin:
The Russians had riot police and thousands of bodybags in the rear of their military forces. They were planning for mass executions from the start.
Now go off back to your cave, vatnik.
@David Bourke: The first two sentences constitute a sensible contribution, thank you very much, but the third one is absurd and uncalled for (the stuff I write on this site, including this page, would suffice to have me arrested in Russia).
@Mick Tobin:”what indications are there that this had been ordered by the Kremlin? ”
Yes, I think this was ordered by the Kremlin.
Why do I think this? Putin said on the day of the invasion that one of the primary aims was the “Denazification of Ukraine”, and the replacement of the “Zelensky Regime”. His propaganda convinced many in Russia (not all of course) that the country is overrun by Nazis. This dehumanises people, and when you dehumanise people crimes like this are easier to commit That is his fault.
(By the way, did you know that when Putin was a KGB colonel stationed in Dresden, East Germany, his job was to supply weapons to the Red Army Faction terrorists (Baader–Meinhof Gang) – source Dr. Mark Felton, historian).
This is why Russian troops, on March 23rd, kidnapped Mayor Olga Sukhenko and her family, the Mayor of Motyzhyn, a few kms south west of Bucha, shot her dead along with her husband Igor and son Alexander, then dumped them in this pit:
It is also why Russian Troops rounded up fighting aged men of Bucha, tortured them and murdered them. In the minds of those Russian troops, they were Nazis. I do genuinely believe they thought that, you can go looking for dark corners of the internet and you will find Russia supporter who are absolutely convinced that Ukraine is overrun by Nazis.
(According to The Times, eighteen mutilated bodies of murdered men, women, and children were found in a basement. Footage released by the Ukrainian army appeared to show a torture chamber in the basement, with bodies having cut-off ears and teeth pulled out.)
They acted like this because of years of Russian propaganda and orders to denazify Ukraine, that belief and those orders came fromthe top, from Putin.
@David Jordan: OK thanks David, so the argumentation would then be indirect in the following sense: first you dehumanise, then you order an invasion, and because you have first dehumanised, a causal link can be established from attrocities to you. Is that a fair rendition, and do you think it would stand up? Because if I’m not mistaken you’re not claiming a direct order against these citizens.
@Mick Tobin: You’re really trying hard to make Russia look innocent.
Please understand Rule 149.
A State is responsible for violations of international humanitarian law attributable to it, including:
(a) violations committed by its organs, including its armed forces;
(b) violations committed by persons or entities it empowered to exercise elements of governmental authority;
(c) violations committed by persons or groups acting in fact on its instructions, or under its direction or control; and
(d) violations committed by private persons or groups which it acknowledges and adopts as its own conduct.
In particular, I draw your attention to this part of Rule 149:
“State responsibility for acts committed in excess of authority or contrary to instructions – A State is responsible for all acts committed by its organs and other persons or entities empowered to act on its behalf, even if such organs or persons exceed their authority or contravene instructions.” – Article 7, THE INTERNATIONALLY WRONGFUL ACT OF A STATE
“In excess of authority or contrary to instruction” – please repeat that a few time until it sinks in.
It does not matter if Putin gave explicit instructions to murder these specific people or not, he did not need to give out names and addresses of those he wanted to be killed.
His army acts under his authority, so violation of international humanitarian law this army commit is on his head / that of Russia, regardless if those crimes when beyond what was asked for.
There is no arguing with this.
This is a fundamental part of international humanitarian law, this is how Nazis at the top were held to account for what their minions committed.
Refs:
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docindex/v1_rul_rule149
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_6_2001.pdf
@David Jordan: – “You’re really trying hard to make Russia look innocent.”
Not at all, on the whole they’re guilty as hell. It’s just that I’m worried the direct implication of a head of state (Putin) by another head of state (Biden) is escalatory – it blows up the draw bridge, and therefore I want to be absolutely sure that the accusation is sound.
- “It does not matter if Putin gave explicit instructions to murder these specific people or not, he did not need to give out names and addresses of those he wanted to be killed.”
Obviously I know it’s not about names and addresses – I was trying to get at the following: was there a direct order against this particular village’s citizens?
I think this is where it gets interesting. If the initial plan had succeeded, the regiment would have proceeded to Kyiv, but because of (1) the dehumanisation campaign, and (2) the plan’s failure, the attrocities ensued. If this can be fairly pinned onto the Kremlin, OK. But the prosecutors had better be sure, also because this is the very rule book that Russia – seemingly backed by China – is trying to rip up.
Dutch expert on international criminal law and lawyer Geert-Jan Knoops (who worked on cases for the Yugoslavia as well as the Rwanda tribunals) said a few days ago that the probability that Putin appears before an international court is zero. So I’m wondering where all of this is going to be headed in practical terms.
But that said, thanks for your feedback.
@Mick Tobin: Are you suggesting it’s understandable that Russian soldiers take it out on civilians?
@Brian Ó Murchú: What I’m saying is that it may be explainable in psychological terms. And if you research war, as some academics do, then this is what you’ll find. I would argue that it is in fact crucial to understand under what kind of conditions these crimes occur, because that might lead one to in turn comprehend how they might be prevented.
US imperialism and its obedient western media have won the day….war has come, truth and reason has fled. Narritives of sectional superiority
have been accepted without question by all of the mainstream media. Example…US exceptionalism, and its front NATO, the superior rights of Zionism over its neighbours. Any voice that looks for reconciliation and peace, or seeks to have both sides heard, is demonised as a Putin stooge, an anti-semia terrorist supporter. We are witnesses to the rise of fascism with the singular thought church of US exceptionalism decent journalists such as Pilger are banished from the media. Yet Edward Snowden walks free in Moscow and Julian Assange rots in jail in Belmarsh Prision…. queer and dangerous times.
@Fergus Quinlan: — You must have run out of ideas as you’ve been copying and pasting for a few days. It was cringeworthy the first time.
@Fergus Quinlan: ye lost me at yer example Fergus.
@Fergus Quinlan: its always easy to adore Russian from a far. Why don’t you go and live there. And not just live, but revoke your western citizenship and get Russian instead. There is no need for you to suffer in the west.
@Clay Pigeon:
He probably does live there
@Fergus Quinlan: Another Kremlin Gremlin busy at work
I think Putin is the last monster we’ll see. Because he’s going to fire off nukes some stage and trigger the end of the world. Anyone who thinks he wouldn’t take down the world with him hasn’t been paying attention.
@Rob Gale: Anyone who thinks Putin can fire off nukes when ever he sees fit are the ones not paying attention.
@Rob Gale: Someone has to press the button rob even if Putin says so. At that stage he’s on his own imo.
It’s not “punishment”, it’s eradication.
I suppose he did not see the horror’s in Palestine as Israeli forces even today murder men women and children and the world stays silent
@Christy Mc Carthy: Help me understand your meaning please.
Who in particular “did not see the horror’s in Palestine as Israeli forces even today murder men women and children and the world stays silent”?
What I cannot understand is why Putin did not move against Ukraine while Trump was in power. Any thoughts?
@Michael Powell: because Putin was getting what he wanted without having to invade with Trump in power. He didn’t worry about NATO expansion when Trump was undermining its influence and threatening to pull out of NATO altogether of re-elected.
Nobody expected such barbaric acts but looking at Putin’s and Russia’s history in past wars we should have.
Putin is a dangerous man He’s either got dementia or spaced out on steroids for his treatment for cancer. Either way he can only be stopped from within .
At a very serious and dangerous time as we now live in I’m glad our former Funky Gibbon president is diminishing
Hod help the people trapped in Mariupol
have your say