War Crimes New 3

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Justice by the People

Published by

The western world based its own foundation on Justice for the people but in the same time it created tools that allowed it to circumvent the foundation of justice when it deals with other peoples of the world. The United States is today the leader of this western world and it has flouted all the rules of justice that it vouched for not long ago.

For Free Distribution

www.worldfutures.info

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Justice by the People Dedicated to the Children of Iraq

Prepared and Published by www.worldfutures.info

1

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Justice by the People Published by www.worldfutures.info 15th April 2007

This book is printed and released under General Public License (GPL) but with limited terms. Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. Under limited UPL the book is bound to be changed or edited freely but we impose a condition here that it cannot be changed or edited without prior agreement with the publishers of the book entitled Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Justice by the People.

2

The Charter of the United Nations WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women, and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.... Article 2 The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles. 1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members.... 3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. 4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. 3

Chapter Vl: Pacific Settlement of Disputes Article 33 1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. 2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessity, call upon the parties to settle their disputes by such means. Note: This charter is clear enough in its explanation of the rights of the nations, members of the UN and the violations of this charter by the US and the British, Australians and even the Israelis in Palestine are indications of their culpability of war crimes

4

Introduction Do we need a War crime tribunal to bring justice to the leaders of the world who have flouted international laws and bring death by the hundreds of thousands in the Islamic world? We are talking about war criminals who are indeed leaders of their nations. The issue at stake is how to bring people like the leaders of the United States of America George W. Bush (President), Dick Cheney (Vice-President) and Donald Rumsfield (former Defense Secretary) and Tony Blair the Prime Minister of Britain, not withstanding John Howard Prime Minister of Australia and Ehud Olmert the Prime Minister of Israel. Why these people and not others like Nouri Al-Maliki, the Prime Minister of Iraq who has signed the hanging papers of Saddam Hussein or some other presidents and Prime Ministers from the Muslim world? The reason is because the Muslim leaders hailing from any parts of the world and for any sorts of reasons, will be easily charged by the International Court of Justice (ICC) but the Bush, Blair and Olmert’s will never be indicted either by the UN or by the ICC. Clearly there is justice at double speed, if not a one sided justice system, that the world is currently dealing with. The UN is looking at the world with lenient eyes laid on the West and a totally bullish attitude towards the rest of the world. There is not going to be a ‘Nuremberg’ for Bush, Blair or Olmert and company. This should be dealt with and it is imperative that the idea of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (KLWCT) be given the proper attention that it deserves. The KLWCT has been formally established by former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Mahathir Mohamad in February this year. When Tun Mahathir Mohamad chaired the newly launched anti-war tribunal under the aegis of the Perdana Global Peace Organization, it was given some coverage on the Internet but most of the mainstream madia’s in the Western world decided to forgo the story. The organization is campaigning for war to become a crime that is punishable by international laws. However, the task to criminalize war is monumental and the leaders targeted by the Kuala Lumpur War Crime Commission are almost untouchable. The tribunal will have to find a way to bring justice to the people whose rights has been violated by the US, the UK, Australia and Israel in particular. 5

The western world based its own foundation on Justice for the people but in the same time it created tools that allowed it to circumvent the foundation of justice when it deals with other peoples of the world. The United States is today the leader of this western world and it has flouted all the rules of justice that it vouched for not long ago. In the long process of history, the western world slid into a moral decay that lead the world to the present war situation. The West, under the leadership of the United States of America has induced its victims to accept a form of rough justice. It ‘freed’ Iraq from a stable regime only to allow the new leaders of the country to execute its own people. Its military is also to be charged for the war crimes it committed and is still committing in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. The US is targeting Muslims who are against its foreign policies, which is one of aggressive military tactics against its opponents. The ICC, like a sitting bull, is watching while the UN is going after other underdogs such as Iran and Sudan or some other weak nations that cannot defend themselves against the pre-emptive military policies of Washington. Will the KLWCT create enough attention to bring the ICC to react against Bush and his allies? The question is palatable and the answer is a forgone conclusion. It is apparent that there will be no swift justice, if not any form of justice against the leaders of the western world who are clearly responsible for the genocidal acts of their soldiers in foreign lands. This book is published with the aim of creating the much needed attention among the public in Malaysia regarding the role of the western leaders mentioned in this Introduction page in the wars that are still ongoing in Iraq and Palestine. It is also a form of support for the idea of a War Crimes Tribunal, such as the KLWCT which should be given more attention by the general public. In the event that the established court of justice such as the ICC is unable to charge people like Bush, Blair, Olmert and Howard, then it might be necessary to send these leaders a clear message of the disapproval of their acts through the KLWCT. Since democracy is for the people, by the people and of the people, hence justice will be by the people and history will decide on the fate of perpetrators of the crimes the KLWCT is after. March 25, 2007 Ampang, Selangor. Malaysia

6

The Kuala Lumpur Declaration THE KUALA LUMPUR INITIATIVE TO CRIMINALISE WAR 17th December 2005 THE Kuala Lumpur Global Peace Forum of concerned peoples from all five continents UNITED in the belief that peace is the essential condition for the survival and well-being of the human race, DETERMINED to promote peace and save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, OUTRAGED over the frequent resort to war in the settlement of disputes between nations, DISTURBED that militarists are preparing for more wars, TROUBLED that use of armed force increases insecurity for all, TERRIFIED that the possession of nuclear weapons and the imminent risk of nuclear war will lead to the annihilation of life on earth.

7

To achieve peace we now declare that: •

Wars increasingly involve the killing of innocent people and are, therefore, abhorrent and criminal.

•

Killings in war are as criminal as the killings within societies in times of peace.

•

Since killings in peace time are subject to the domestic law of crime, killings in war must likewise be subject to the international law of crimes. This should be so irrespective of whether these killings in war are authorized or permitted by domestic law.

•

All commercial, financial, industrial and scientific activities that aid and abet war should be criminalised.

•

All national leaders who initiate aggression must be subjected to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

•

All nations must strengthen the resolve to accept the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and institute methods to settle

•

international disputes by peaceful means and to renounce war.

•

Armed force shall not be used except when authorised by a Resolution passed by two-thirds majority of the total membership of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

•

All legislators and all members of Government must affirm their belief in peace and pledge to strive for peace.

•

Political parties all over the world must include peace as one of their principal objectives.

•

Non-Governmental Organisations committed to the promotion of peace should be set up in all nations.

•

Public servants and professionals, in particular in the medical, legal, educational and scientific fields, must promote peace and campaign

8

actively against war. •

The media must actively oppose war and the incitement to war and consciously promote the peaceful settlement of international disputes.

•

Entertainment media must cease to glorify war and violence and should instead cultivate the ethos of peace

•

All religious leaders must condemn war and promote peace.

To these ends the Forum resolves to establish a permanent Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur to: IMPLEMENT this Initiative. OPPOSE policies and programmes that incite war. SEEK the cooperation of NGOs worldwide to achieve the goals of this Initiative.

9

International Crimes as defined by the

International Criminal Court The following acts are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility: (a) Crimes against Peace: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing: (b) War Crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity: (c) Crimes against Humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated ... The Creation of an International Criminal Court The International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) was officially established on July 1, 2002, and is located in The Hague, The Netherlands. However, all of the world’s nations have not ratified the Rome Statute of the I.C.C., the document outlining the purposes, capabilities, and restrictions of the I.C.C. In fact, the United States, Russia, 10

and Japan are among the major industrialized states that have yet to ratify this document. However, a sufficient number of nations have ratified the Rome Statute, and in accordance with its rules, the court now officially exists. What are war crimes tribunals?

International war crimes tribunals are courts of law established to try individuals accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Despite the often heinous nature of the crimes that individuals commit during intractable conflicts, including genocide, torture, and rape, it has become common practice to offer the accused an opportunity to explain his or her actions in front of the victims and their families, as well as the media.

11

12 Hague Convention II Section 1 (Chapter iii - POWs Section III - Orders

Geneva Convention to Maritime Waters

Hague Convention III

1899 The Hague

Application of 1864

First Geneva Convention

1864 - Geneva

Hague Conventin IV Section 1 (Chap IV - POWs Section III - Orders New Geneva Convention IV

Revised as Geneva Convention III

New Geneva Convention I1

Revised as Geneva Convention 1

1949 Geneva

Second Geneva Convention

Revision

1929 Geneva

Application of 1906 Geneva Convention to Maritime Waters

Hague Convention X

Revision

1906 Geneva 1907 The Hague

Development of the Geneva Convention From 1864 to 1949

Source: Wikipedia

What are the ‘Geneva Conventions’ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Geneva Conventions consist of four treaties formulated in Geneva, Switzerland, that set the standards for international law for humanitarian concerns. They chiefly concern the treatment of non-combatants and prisoners of war. They do not affect the use of weapons in war which are covered by the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 and the Geneva Protocol on use of gas and biological weapons of 1925. The Conventions were the results of efforts by Henry Dunant, who was motivated by the horrors of war he witnessed at the Battle of Solferino in 1859. In 1977 and 2005 three separate amendments, called protocols, were made part of the Geneva Conventions. The adoption of the First Convention followed the foundation of the International Committee of the Red Cross in 1863. The text is given in the Resolutions of the Geneva International Conference, Geneva, 26-29 October 1863. As of 2 August 2006,[1] when the Republic of Montenegro adopted the four conventions, they have been ratified by 194 countries. As per article 49, 50, 129 and 146 of the Geneva Conventions I, II, III and IV, respectively, all signatory states are required to enact sufficient national laws that make grave violations of the Geneva Conventions a punishable criminal offense. The conventions and their agreements * First Geneva Convention “for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field” (first adopted in 1864, last revision in 1949) 13

* Second Geneva Convention “for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea” (first adopted in 1949, successor of the 1907 Hague Convention X)

* Third Geneva Convention “relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War” (first adopted in 1929, last revision in 1949) *Fourth Geneva Convention “relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War” (first adopted in 1949, based on parts of the 1907 Hague Convention IV) In addition, there are three additional amendment protocols to the Geneva Convention: * Protocol I (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January 2007 it had been ratified by 167 countries. * Protocol II (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of NonInternational Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January 2007 it had been ratified by 163 countries. * Protocol III (2005): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem. As of 12 January 2007 it had been ratified by nine countries and signed but not yet ratified by an additional 75 countries. All four conventions were last revised and ratified in 1949, based on previous revisions and partly on some of the 1907 Hague Conventions; the whole set is referred to as the “Geneva Conventions of 1949” or simply the “Geneva Conventions”. Later conferences have added provisions prohibiting certain methods of warfare and addressing issues of civil wars. Nearly all 200 countries of the world are “signatory” nations, in that they have ratified these conventions. Clara Barton was instrumental in campaigning for the ratification of the First Geneva Convention by the United States; the U.S. signed in 1882. By the Fourth Geneva Convention some 47 nations had ratified the agreements.

14

Tun Mahathir’s definition of war crimes Tun Mahathir argued in his speech during “Expose war crimes – criminalize war” conference and exhibition on February 5th 2007 that conventions such as the Geneva Convention did not identify war crimes inadequately to cover the crimes of the warmongers, “the wars they wage and the brutalities they commit or cause to commit during the war,” He added that the best jurists in the world must be assembled to draft laws making warring criminal, making sanctions criminal, the use or production of depleted uranium in weapons and other WMD as criminal. The punishments for these crimes must be spelled out in as great a detail as possible he urged. He said the enforcement of the findings and the enforcers should be identified. “They will not be Government’s until the big powers learn to respect international laws,” And he mentioned the most important aspect of the type of tribunal that he believe would do justice to the people when he mentioned that “the people as represented by various organisations and NGOs will carry out the punishment,” against the warmongers. Tun Mahathir also suggested that “Laws, the concept of law and punishment, the jurisdiction of laws change with the times. Now certain nations enforce their laws extra-territorially. The U.S. invaded Panama to capture Noriega and to bring him before a U.S. court for trial and punishment under U.S. laws. “Clearly concepts of laws, justice and jurisdiction of national laws have changed. It is proper therefore for laws to be enacted not by the Government but by people and organisations in the case of criminalising war. “The jurists should have no qualms about the unorthodox laws they should draft or the kind of punishment they should prescribe. In a world where powerful countries can decide on regime change for other countries, the laws that are designed to criminalise wars are no more unusual than the regime change laws, the laws to legitimise the attacks against Afghanistan and Iraq, the extra-territorial laws,” he said. 15

In essence the former Prime Minister is calling for a new type of justice system that will not be based purely on the United Nations or the Geneva Conventions laws and principles since these has been violated by the sole super power of the word. He believe the new type of laws, the new permanent public tribunal for war crimes based on the new definition of war crimes will be “as legitimate as can be” and they will be known as “the laws of the people.” Basically, the KLWCT will invite international jurists of repute to study, discuss and decide the form the Tribunal should take, to propose the laws and the jurisdiction and other related matters. And the Tribunal should be tasked with trying in absentia if necessary the war criminals as identified by the victims and the peoples of the countries which have suffered from the attacks ordered by the leaders of the countries identified.

16

The Tribunal

A Plan of Action To ensure the smooth running of such a public tribunal and to guarantee its credibility, there is the need to broaden the range of acceptance of this idea of a People’s War Crime Tribunal. The nations that are weary of the massacres that have been perpetrated by the Allied forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and recently in Somalia and Lebanon will have to come to a compromise. Tun Mahathir exposed some of his ideas and the need to propagate the workings of the KLWCT. He said there was the need to build a base for spreading the word, the idea that wars are crimes against humanity. He also mentioned that those who resort to wars in furtherance of their ideology or agenda are common criminals and must be labeled as such and be punished. The whole aim of this tribunal is send the message that war is a crime and that peace must be established in order for the humans to be called civilized. According to Tun Mahathir, the first move in the struggle for peace is to ensure that people know the truth about war, about the dangers which even the attackers and the victors would be exposed to. Since the world media outlets are owned and controlled by warring nations, the majority of which would support wars and find or invent excuses for wars or would lie to encourage wars, said Mahathir, the people has to have their own means of contact and communication, its own network to counter the war propaganda machines and their lies. “We have to build a base for spreading the word, the idea that wars are crimes against humanity, that those who resort to wars in furtherance of their ideology or agenda are common criminals and must be labelled as such and punished,” he said. Tun proposed the establishment of: a. worldwide network of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) for peace, b. to encourage peace activists everywhere, to talk peace and the 17

criminalisation of war, c. to physically obstruct war and the preparations for war, d. to condemn the military industrial complex, e. to do everything possible to gain support for the movement to make war a crime in the statute books of the international community. The former Prime Minister also suggested that in the countries where Governments are elected the anti-war activists and supporters must campaign in favour of candidates who renounce war. He pointed out that such campaigns are especially important in the militarily powerful countries. We must make sure that only anti-war candidates get support for Presidency and Prime Ministership, and for all legislative bodies. “We must ignore other attributes or promises made by the candidates and single-mindedly and solidly support anti-war candidates.” is his call to the voters. Mentioning anti-war activists he said that they may be a minority but they have shown a small minority in the United States can actually determine that only candidates endorsed by them would be elected. “Only if the leaders elected are pacifists and subscribe to our creed will there be peace in this world; will the criminalisation of war be possible. It may take a long time. Rome they say was not built in a day. Creating a world free of war, a world where the rule of law govern the behaviour of nations, where the weak and the strong can co-exist may not take as long as it took to build Rome. But it would still take considerable time,” The War Crimes Tribunal he insisted is intended to make people understand the horrors of war, the killings and the brutality. And understanding what war is capable of doing to us, and more so in the future, hopefully would galvanise us into taking action. And it is this action that Tun Mahathir was focusing upon when he called on the people to work out strategies and to act to sustain the campaign against war for as long as it takes. “What we are trying to do is honourable and noble. Civilisation would be more meaningful if war, killings and destruction is no longer an accepted option in solving disputes between nations. Until war is criminalised we would not be truly civilized.” he said 18

He suggested the creation of a permanent tribunal which will be: I. recognised by the victims of aggression and right-minded people and II. empowered by them to hear the charges levelled at the warmongers, the leaders and Governments of aggressor nations, III. to determine their innocence or guilt and to prescribe punishment. About the tribunal, he suggested that: IV. it must be made up of respected international jurists who would have no personal or national interest in the matters referred to them, V. whose judgement must be based on evidence and not sentiment.

19

The Execution of Justice The interesting part in the concretization of the idea of a public or people’s tribunal against war crimes committed by people of the like of George W. Bush and Tony

Blair and their lackeys would be the deliverance of the justice decided by the people’s tribunal. In that case we are talking of the eventual successful implementation of the KLWCT which is still in its infancy but is gathering momentum. Tun Mahathir conceded that the Tribunal he is setting up will have no power of enforcing its punishment meted to the war criminals since the people the Tribunal would judge may be too powerful. He urged the people to decide on the ways for the judgment and the punishment to be served to the accused who would be condemned by the KLWCT. We should find ways and forms of punishments that are within our capacity until such time when the International Community respects and upholds the jurisdiction of the Tribunal he added. Some of the ways he suggests are as follows: a. Trial in absentia We are seeing today examples of the form of punishment that can be meted out. Bush and Blair are now totally reviled and condemned by the world and by their own people. To a certain extent they have been tried and sentenced by their own people and media. It was a trial in absentia. The Tribunal that we set up can conduct a proper trial even if the accused are not present. A respectable and totally impartial Tribunal applying recognised laws will surely find its findings respected by the world just as the world respects the Nobel Laureates for example. b. Labeling the criminals As to the punishment, these people if found guilty should be labelled “War Criminal” by everyone. Today we see countries enacting laws to punish crimes or wrong-doings perpetrated in other countries, enacting extra-territorial laws. We may not be able to get Governments of countries to enact laws to label the War Criminals. But the NGO’s, the sympathetic media can append the label “War Criminal” whenever their names are mentioned. 20

c. Campaigns by NGO’s People and the NGO’s for peace should make these War Criminals feel unwelcome wherever they go. They should be literally hounded. They should have full frontal and profile pictures put up everywhere as war criminals. And historians should always refer to them as War Criminals in history books. d. Crimes against humanity All leaders, especially leaders of powerful nations hope to be remembered, to go down in history as great men, to be identified with great deeds. War criminals tried and found guilty by the Tribunal should be remembered for the crimes against humanity, for the people they kill, the destruction they wrought. They should be labelled as such and mentioned in history books as war criminals, always and forever. e. Name them as they deserve They should be accorded the names they deserve for the evil deeds they had committed. Prime Minister Blair regretted the hanging of Saddam Hussein but at the same time, reminded people not to forget that Saddam was the Butcher of Baghdad. What is Blair if not the Co-Murderer of 500,000 Iraqi children and the liar who told the British that Saddam had WMD which could be launched against Britain within 45 minutes. f. Killer of Children History should remember Blair and Bush as the Killer of Children or as the Lying Prime Minister and President. What Blair and Bush had done is worse than what Saddam had done. We should not hang Blair if the Tribunal finds him guilty but he should always carry the label War Criminal, Killer of Children, Liar. And so should Bush and the pocket Bush of the bushlands of Australia (meaning John Howard). The former Prime Minister also suggested that in the countries where Governments are elected the anti-war activists and supporters must campaign in favour of candidates who renounce war. He pointed out that such campaigns are especially important in the militarily powerful countries. We must make sure that only anti-war candidates get support for Presidency and Prime Ministership, and for all legislative bodies. 21

22

23

“We should find ways and forms of punishments that are within our capacity until such time when the International Community respects and upholds the jurisdiction of the Tribunal” said Tun Mahathir

24

The sad face of Iraq

Iraqi Children suffers malnutrition International aid efforts and the U.N. oil-for-food program helped reduce the ruinous impact of sanctions, and the rate of acute malnutrition among the youngest Iraqis gradually dropped from a peak of 11 percent in 1996 to 4 percent in 2002. But the invasion in March 2003 and the widespread looting in its aftermath severely damaged the basic structures of governance in Iraq, and persistent violence across the country slowed the pace of reconstruction almost to a halt.

25

They saw the worst of American occupation of their land. They also saw the death of their parents and siblings. America and its regime is responsible for these deaths. There UN has closed an eye on the massacres commited by the American soldiers. The Americans are denying the crimes, calling the atrocities the casualties of war or inevitable collateral damages.

Oil gains for the West The Americans, British and other western oil companies will soon register windfall gains with their exploitation of Iraqi oil. The new Iraqi regime in Baghdad has been forced to agree on an oil for security deal that will allow Western companies to benefit from Iraq’s vast oil reserves while the regime gets military protection from the mercenaries of the ‘coalition of the willing’.

26

Muslims are forced to defend themselves...at all cost. This is the result of the massive war aginst terrosism.

Note: All the photos and cartoons or graphics were taken from the Internet

27

Dick Cheney, Vice President of the US is behind the entire scheme for the exploitation of Iraqi oil. He is known as the leader of the Neo-Conservative movement in the US. The Neo-Cons as they are called are extremist capitalist and they believe in a new century for America. In this century they intend to ‘capture’ the world resources and dominate Muslim lands as they see the Muslims as their number one enemy. Islam they say is a plague that can be eradicated hence their outright murderous campaign in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Somalia. Soon they will target other lands that has oil, gold and gas or other resources. Are we seeing the return of the days of slavery? The Neo-cons defends slavery as a war necessity! 28

There is no let up in the anti-war campaign. Yet more needs to be done to end the Iraq and Afghan wars.

29

“In the countries where Governments are elected the anti-war activists and supporters must campaign in favour of candidates who renounce war. Such campaigns are especially important in the militarily powerful countries. We must make sure that only anti-war candidates get support for Presidency and Prime Ministership, and for all legislative bodies.” 30

The struggle against oppression and war crimes by Israel

Photograph of a Palestinian boy shown here standing firm against the Israeli army in Gaza. This image shows the determination and the will of the oppressed people to fight the gross injustice of Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

31

The Iraq War

Establishing the crimes committed by the US In the speech delivered by Tun Mahathir during the forum that preceded the opening of the KLWCT, the former Prime Minster said “war is about killing people. Killing people as we all know is regarded as a crime in any human society claiming to be civilised. Even if the killing is justified, it would still be wrong, it would still be a crime, it would still be murder. No one may take the law into his own hands and execute a person even if he is a murderer. That is how strongly we feel about taking someone’s life,” “Yet civilised human society, including and above all those which claim to be the most civilised and advanced regard the killing of people in war as legitimate. There is a terrible contradiction here. It cannot be that the massive killing of people in war is legitimate and morally right, when the killing of an individual however justified is considered wrong. Either both are right or both are wrong. If we regard the mass killing of people in war as right then the murder of individuals within society must also be right. But we would be horrified if any human society would consider murder as right. Every human society boasting to be civilised would consider murder as a crime, a crime so serious as to warrant the highest penalty. How then can the same society consider indiscriminate mass killings of innocent people, children, old people, sick people and invalids by the hundreds and thousands and millions even, as right, proper and legitimate,” said Tun Mahathir. The Iraq war was unjustified from the very first moment the George W. Bush administration decided to invade the Muslim country. It was a war based on fallacies and it did not get the sacrosanct sanctioning of the UN to begin with. Washington started a war that should be categorized as a crime if we relate it to the definition of war crimes according to the ICC. The Iraq war is illegitimate, illegal and is a crime. It was an outrageous attack by a UN member state against another UN member states which make it a violation of the Charter of the UN itself. The Iraq war started by Washington is a war that has violated all the rules of engagements in the world of warfare. It resembled more to the acts of a team of mercenaries attacking a sovereign nation while the rest of the world could do nothing 32

about it. But who has the right to establish the principles of war crimes in the case of the Iraq war that the US started? The ICC has washed its hands off the issue while the UN is treating the occupation of the US as sign of stability in the destroyed nation. The KLWTC feels otherwise and it has put on record its desire to establish the crimes committed by the Western leaders in the Iraq war and would surely pursue the prosecution of the same leaders in the future. Bush, Blair, Howard were formally charged and sentenced for major war crimes by The Peoples Court of Christchurch in Australia in 2004. They were also charged and sentenced by an Egyptian, Philippines and a host of other such public or peoples courts across the world. Yet they are still free to visit all those countries without any arrest warrants delivered to them. This makes them bolder and untouchable. On 7th February, 2007 the Kuala Lumpur War Crime Commission chaired by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad heard nine charges against US President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair as well as Australian Prime Minister John Howard for the sufferings of the people in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. There were no representatives from Afghanistan where the US and the Nato are reigning supreme. The charges against the US and its allies were presented by a legal counsel on behalf of the war crimes victims, Barrister (Inner Temple) & Advocate & Solicitor High Court of Malaya, Matthias Chang before Dr Mahathir and the other five commission members at the last day of the three-day war crimes conference. Chang said Bush, Blair and Howard through a deliberate plan of deception, falsehood, forgery and outright lies misled their respective Congress and Parliament to wage war against Iraq which was a “crime against peace,” Most of the people’s tribunals heard the same accusations against the trio, though at times instead of Howard, Ariel Sharon the former Premier of Israel was included. What is different from the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission and the previous people’s war crimes courts is the processes of the war crimes tribunal and the method it will use to ‘confer’ the tag of criminal against 33

Bush, Blair and Howard. In the past, the crowd will listen to the speeches by the victims or by the prosecutors of the public courts where the war criminals are to be judged in absentia. The crowd will participate in the debate and the judges will condemn the leaders like Bush, Blair and Howard as war criminals. At the end, the judgment remains within the court, which is a court that does not have the power to confer the judgment to the leaders in question. The KLWCT intend to make it different and this is one significant point that is going to be crucial in the delivering of the justice against the leaders found guilty by this new form of war crime court. It must be noted that the KLWCT has been successful in grabbing the attention of the ICC itself and of the UN, probably because it had Tun Mahathir as the Chairman of the courts proceeding and also due to the arguments that were floating during the proceedings at the Putra World Trade Center (PWTC). Among the charges brought against the trio, the most significant is the charge regarding the lies they put forward to mislead their respective Congress and Parliaments to wage war against Iraq in 2003, which was a “crime against peace.” Bush-Blair-Howard remains the main actors in a terrible war against Islam, a war that the West crafted right after the collapse of communism in Russia. After the fall of the wall of the wall of Berlin, it was clear that the Muslims will be targeted as the next opponent to American democracy and capitalism. The peak of the war against Islam came with the arrival of George W. Bush as President of the US thanks to a superb trick that allowed him to win despite losing to Al-Gore in numbers and percentages in national votes. The KL war crimes commission has also heard charges against them for ordering the destruction of vital facilities essential to civilian lives in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine while the fourth one for the bombing of schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, residential areas, historical sites and conveniently labeling the destruction as “collateral damage”. Dr Mahathir said the commission was to respond to several petition of war crime victims and investigate into their complaints.

34

“We appreciate there are other tribunals but there are so many complaints, the other tribunals perhaps are not being able to hear the complaint. We feel there is a need for the setting up this tribunal (Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal) and give an opportunity for those war crimes victims to voice out their complaints and to seek redress,” he said. The commission would investigate complaints of war crimes and thereafter to submit and report to the tribunal that would be set up, which are still at a protem stage. Another interesting part will be the investigation – though it is obvious that sufficient proof exist as was displayed during the concurrent exhibition held at the PWTC.

35

Can the ICC charge Bush & Blair In a press statement following the establishment of the KLWCT, the ICC said that George W. Bush and Tony Blair could face the prospect of an ICC investigation for alleged coalition war crimes in Iraq. This was said by the court’s chief prosecutor to the international press in March, 2007. The prospects of the ICC finding a reason to drag the two most powerful men on Earth to face its retribution have galvanized the idea that the KLWCT has made an impact on the international community. Luis Moreno-Ocampo urged Arab countries, particularly Iraq, to sign up to the court to enable allegations against the West to be pursued. Iraq’s ambassador to the United Nations said that his country was actively considering signing up. However, Iraq’s government stayed numb on the idea since it did not make any real move to join the ICC. It surely fears retribution for its own alleged crimes since it took power after the US invasion of Iraq. America has refused to accept the court’s jurisdiction and is unlikely to hand over any of its citizens to face trial. However, Britain has signed up and the Government has indicated its willingness to tackle accusations of war crimes against a number of British soldiers. Both the US and Britain are shielding their soldiers from the possibility of being dragged to the ICC for war crimes. Their actions in wars from Vietnam to Iraq have been classified as those of mercenaries acting upon the orders of war criminals. There have been massive killings in the war zones, killing of unarmed soldiers, escaping civilians and most of all, children and babies similar to the actions of the US soldiers in Fallujah, Iraq. Mr Moreno-Ocampo said it was frustrating that the court was viewed in the Arab world as biased in favour of the West. In fact, the court is simply viewed as biased in the entire Islamic world. It recently accused Sudan of criminal acts in Darfur, a region that has been classified by Muslim NGO’s as under the control of the Sudanese government.

36

The court’s chief prosecutor told The Sunday Telegraph that he would be willing to launch an inquiry and could envisage a scenario in which the Prime Minister and American President George W Bush could one day face charges at The Hague. The ICC is also seen as having breached the sovereignty of Sudan when it referred to the Darfur issue since it was pressed by Western capitals to issue condemnations against Khartoum. Biased and unfounded, the ICC lost credibility a long time ago and it is a bit too late for its chiefs to claim credibility in the face of mounting criticism world wide against western war bullies. The ICC is limited by the fact that it has to have the agreement of the countries before it decides to bring any of its leaders to face the dock and to answer charges raised against them. Something which sounds farfetched for people in the Islamic world since no thieves from the western world would want to come to court by their own good will. Some Muslim countries have criticized what they claim is the court’s reluctance to address offences committed by western governments. Sudan, which has been investigated over the alleged killing of civilians in Darfur, has called for the court to investigate coalition actions in Iraq, while Tun Mahathir has announced plans to set up an alternative war crimes tribunal to hear complaints against countries including Britain, Israel and America. The court is restricted in what it can investigate. The UN Security Council can ask it to act - as in the case of Darfur - or the court can launch an investigation if it receives a complaint from a state which is party to the Rome agreement that established it. It can also look into alleged offences carried out by, or on the territory of, a party to the agreement. Mahathir has proposed that the KLWTC tries the accused in absentia, which is something the ICC is yet to be able to do since its strings are obviously being pulled from western capitals. Mr Moreno-Ocampo said it was still possible for an investigation to be launched into coalition actions in Iraq if that country signed up. In the case of Iraq, it simply means that Iraq must sign up and then only the Iraqi people or government can put forward claims of war 37

crimes against the coalition forces in Iraq. Human rights groups in the western world believe there is little chance of this happening. The court is currently prosecuting cases against the Lords Resistance Army in Uganda, a militia leader in the Democratic Republic of Congo and a number of individuals alleged to have been involved in the conflict in Darfur, all non-Western nations. It gives the impression that the ICC is biased and will never entertain claims of such crimes any western regimes. EU – US deal on ICC European Union member states will be allowed to strike deals with the United States, giving American troops limited immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Such deals will be permitted provided certain conditions are met, such as granting immunity to diplomats and soldiers only. European states will also want a guarantee that Americans accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity will be dealt with by American courts. The decision was announced after a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday. Twelve countries have already signed deals promising not to hand over US citizens on their territory to the Court. The US withdrew its signature from the ICC treaty last May (2006), saying it feared politically-motivated trials. The views of Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi (UiTM) By far and large international law on genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and wars of aggression are applied selectively and in a racist and colonial fashion. Except for the mass murders in Nazi Germany and former Yugoslavia, no other crime perpetrated by Europeans and Americans has ever been prosecuted in international courts. European, American and Australian colonisers have committed genocide on four continents. The United States has bombed 28 countries since World War II. Europe and America are complicit in the genocide that is raging unhindered in Palestine, Gaza and Lebanon. No bells toll for the victims of mass murders in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Kampuchea, Laos, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Chechnya, Chile, Argentina and Nicaragua. No one has been prosecuted. 38

The KL War Crimes Commission and Tribunal will, on the other hand, provide a forum to all, irrespective of race, religion or nationality, who are victims of mass crimes to make their case before the Commission and the Tribunal. Admittedly, the KLWCT suffers from many limitations. But many distinguished jurists from around the world believe that it can make a significant impact. It can mobilise the conscience of the world community. It can report its findings to the General Assembly of the United Nations with a view to a “Uniting for Peace Resolution”. It can submit its findings to the ICC to enable the ICC to wake up from its stupor. It can transmit the report of its deliberations to the 104 countries that have ratified the Rome statute. Some of these states like Germany and Belgium have laws that permit prosecutions for genocide and for crimes against humanity no matter where the offence was alleged to have been committed. Finally, the KL War Crimes Tribunal can refer its findings to many peace loving groups in the USA and elsewhere and request them to exert democratic pressures on their leaders to end this senseless slaughter of the innocents. In a talking point program on the BBC radio this year, the responses by citizens from Europe and the US leaves a lot to ponder upon. We publish here some of the views expressed by the individuals who participated in the debate on the issue of the ICC and its rights to put American or British leaders on trial. The deeper subtext to this debate is whether the United States believes that its own laws should be subordinated to international ones. In Europe we are used to this concept, recognising that no serious progress can be made without harmonisation of the rules by which nations and societies are bound. I have heard that the US constitution expressly forbids the state’s powers to be handed over to a ‘foreign’ jurisdiction. If we are to make progress on a global level, the US constitution will inevitably 39

have to be amended. The ‘global’ interest cannot be perceived as ‘foreign’ to any particular country’s interests. Nick Fraser, Germany If the ICC can grant immunity to US diplomats and soldiers then why not Yugoslavian diplomats and soldiers? We may as well send Slobodan Mylosovic home to face trial in Yugoslavia. Is the International Criminal Court really an ICC if concessions are given to individual nations? It has become very clear that the USA now considers itself in isolation, both in act and in rhetoric. Situations such as this do little to cement relationships between the USA and the rest of the world. America needs to be a player on the big team rather than a dictatorial bully in the international arena. I see a complete split coming between the UN and the USA. David, Denmark A glance at the proposals put forward for the election of Judges to the ICC shows that it would be near impossible for the court to be abused politicaly. The argument has little substance. If we are to eventually live in a free and fair world, then institutions like the ICC must be encouraged and the west, which still seems to think itself supirer to other nations must learn to understand that they are amoung equals and International Law applies to them as well as to their neighbours. David Bourne, United Kingdom Of course making exceptions of immunity for citizens of a particular state hampers the credibility and effectiveness of the ICC. It is possible to understand though why the US would like to get such immunity, being unwilling to “sacrifice its judicial sovereignty to an international body that does not recognize principles established by our constitution (William, USA)”, forgetting that the US constitution is no sacred guideline for the rest of the world. It is also easy to see why countries that want to become mebers of NATO such as Rumania, and a state heavily relying on US support such as Israel would be prepared to sign a bilateral agreement with the US. What is very hard to understand is why the United Kingdom, Spain and Italy wouldwant to make this exception for US citizens and sign a bilateral agreement. Frans, Netherlands 40

If the US sacrificed its sovereignty to the ICC, the court would become nothing but a political tool for discontents. The proof is inherent in the “talking point” responses from persons who are not US citizens. I praise our president for standing tall on this now purely political matter. RCB,USA America, who was at the front line for demanding a criminal court for Bosnia and after WWII now wants to have nothing to do with such things. America has, and will continue to believe, that it and it alone is an exception to all the rules. I admire what they have done in terms of their own economic and military success, but they still believe they’re “above” the rest of the world. They have no qualms about imposing their values on others, but are the first to stand up and react whenever someone seeks to impose their values on them. David Hill, Canada I think the Bush administration’s resistance to the ICC is shameful. It would not have been possible had Clinton signed earlier and sent the treaty to the Senate for ratification. Many of my fellow Americans are still fuzzy about the ICC, but those informed are almost unanimous in our support for it and shamefaced over Bush’s attitude. The EU should resist any immunity deals with the US and, if Bush tries to “unsign” the treaty, bring formal UN Charter violation charges before the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Michael Westmoreland-White, USA Yes it can technically work, yet it loses its meaning if the US does not sign up, being the most powerful country at the moment. No compromise should be made for the US. They should abide or stay out, and be pressured to join according to the regulations set for every nation. The US will do anything to preserve its international interests, just as they refuse to sign the agreement of mines and chemical weapons. Pieter, UK/Belgium Courtesy BBC.co.uk website. 41

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

The 9 charges against Bush and Blair The charges against the US and its allies were presented by the legal counsel on behalf of the war crime victims, Matthias Chang, before Dr Mahathir and the other five commission members at the final day of the three-day war crimes conference organised by the Perdana Global Peace Conference. Chang said Bush, Blair and Howard, through a deliberate plan of deception, falsehood, forgery and outright lies, misled their respective Congress and Parliament to wage war against Iraq which was a “crime against peace.” The trio were also being charged for embarking on a systematic campaign to destroy Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine economically and militarily, he said. He said the third charge against them was for ordering the destruction of vital facilities essential to civilian lives in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine while the fourth was for the bombing of schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, residential areas and historical sites and conveniently labelling the destruction as “collateral damage”. The three leaders were also charged with allowing the use of weapons of mass destruction that inflicted indiscriminate death and suffering against civilian targets such as the cluster bomb, napalm bomb, phosporous bomb and depleted uranium ammunition, said Chang. The sixth charge said that Bush, Blair and Howard have fraudulently manipulated the United Nations and the Security Council as well as corrupting its members to commit crimes against peace and war times, he said. Through the aforesaid conduct, Chang said the three had destroyed the environment of Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. The eighth charge was that Bush, Blair and Howard ordered and condoned the violation of human rights, specifically the civilians in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay in Cuba as well as other prisons known and unknown in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and anywhere else in the world.

42

The last charge spelled out that Bush, Blair and Howard systematically controlled and manipulated, directed and misinformed the mass media so as to incite war to achieve their military objectives in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. The commission would investigate complaints of war crimes and thereafter to submit and report to the tribunal that would be set up, which are still at the pro tem stage. Source: Bernama

43

Ramsay Clarke’s report to the International War Crimes Tribunal A report on United States War Crimes against Iraq Report to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal By Maisonneuve Press, 1992 Initial Complaint Charging George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker, Richard Cheney, William Webster, Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named With Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Other Criminal Acts and High Crimes in Violation of the Charter of the United Nations, International Law, the Constitution of the United States and Laws made in Pursuance Thereof. In the fact sheet of Clark’s report to the tribunal, it is stated that when the Iraqi government nationalized the Iraqi Petroleum Company in 1972, the Nixon Administration embarked on a campaign to destabilize the Iraqi government. It was in the 1970s that the U.S. first armed and then abandoned the Kurdish people, costing tens of thousands of Kurdish lives. The U.S. manipulated the Kurds through CIA and other agencies to attack Iraq, intending to harass Iraq. The U.S., sometimes alone among nations, supported Israel when it defied scores of UN resolutions concerning Palestinian rights, when it invaded Lebanon in a war which took tens of thousands of lives, and during its continuing occupation of southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, the WestBank and Gaza. 44

The United States itself engaged in aggressions in violation of international law by invading Grenada in 1983, bombing Tripoli and Benghazi in Libya in 1986, financing the contra in Nicaragua, UNITA in southern Africa and supporting military dictatorships in Liberia, Chile, E1 Salvador, Guatemala, the Philippines, and many other places. The U.S. invasion of Panama in December 1989 involved the same and additional violations of international law that apply to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. The U.S. invasion took between 1,000 and 4,000 Panamanian lives. The United States government is still covering up the death toll. U.S. aggression caused massive property destruction throughout Panama. According to U.S. and international human rights organization estimates, Kuwait’s casualties from Iraq’s invasion and the ensuing months of occupation were in the “hundreds”-between 300 and 600.4 Reports from Kuwait list 628 Palestinians killed by Kuwaiti death squads since the Sabah royal family regained control over Kuwait. The United States changed its military plans for protecting its control over oil and other interests in the Arabian Peninsula in the late 1980s when it became clear that economic problems in the USSR were debilitating its military capacity and Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan. Thereafter, direct military domination within the region became the U.S. strategy. With the decline in U.S. oil production through 1989, experts predicted U.S. oil imports from the Gulf would rise from 10% that year to 25% by the year 2000. Japanese and European dependency is much greater. The Charges 1. The United States engaged in a pattern of conduct beginning in or before 1989 intended to lead Iraq into provocations justifying U.S. military action against Iraq and permanent U.S. military domination of the Gulf This course of conduct of the US in the Middle East in 1991 constitutes a crime against peace. 2. President Bush from August 2, 1990, intended and acted to prevent any negotiations with the Iraqi regime. 45

Without consultation or communication with Congress, President Bush ordered 40,000 U.S. military personnel to advance the U.S. buildup in Saudi Arabia in the first week of August 1990. President Bush coerced the United Nations Security Council into an unprecedented series of resolutions, finally securing authority for any nation in its absolute discretion by all necessary means to enforce the resolutions. To secure votes the U.S. paid multi-billion dollar bribes, offered arms for regional wars, threatened and carried out economic retaliation, forgave multi-billion dollar loans (including a $7 billion loan to Egypt for arms), offered diplomatic relations despite human rights violations and in other ways corruptly exacted votes, creating the appearance of near universal international approval of U.S. policies toward Iraq. A country which opposed the U.S., as Yemen did, lost millions of dollars in aid, as promised, the costliest vote it ever cast. President Bush consistently rejected and ridiculed Iraq’s efforts to negotiate a peaceful resolution, beginning with Iraq’s August 12, 1990, proposal, largely ignored, and ending with its mid-February 1991 peace offer which he called a “cruel hoax.” For his part, President Bush consistently insisted there would be no negotiation, no compromise, no face saving, no reward for aggression. Simultaneously, he accused Saddam Hussein of rejecting diplomatic solutions. President Bush led a sophisticated campaign to demonize Saddam Hussein, calling him a Hitler, repeatedly citing reports-which he knew were false-of the murder of hundreds of incubator babies, accusing Iraq of using chemical weapons on his own people and on the Iranians knowing U.S. intelligence believed the reports untrue. After subverting every effort for peace, President Bush began the destruction of Iraq answering his own question, “Why not wait? The world could wait any longer.. The course of conduct constitutes a crime against peace.

46

3. President Bush ordered the destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity throughout Iraq. Systematic aerial and missile bombardment of Iraq was ordered to begin at 6:30 p.m. EST January 16, 1991, eighteen and one-half hours after the deadline set on the insistence of President Bush, in order to be reported on television evening news in the U.S. The bombing continued for forty-two days. It met no resistance from Iraqi aircraft and no effective anti-aircraft or anti-missile ground fire. Iraq was defenseless. Only the United States could have carried out this destruction of Iraq, and the war was conducted almost exclusively by the United States. This conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict. 4. The United States intentionally bombed and destroyed civilian life, commercial and business districts, schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, shelters, residential areas, historical sites, private vehicles and civilian government offices. As a result of the bombing of facilities essential to civilian life, residential and other civilian buildings and areas, at least 125,000 men, women and children were killed. The Red Crescent Society of Jordan estimated 113,000 civilian dead, 60% children, the week before the end of the war. The conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict. 5. The United States intentionally bombed indiscriminately throughout Iraq. In aerial attacks, including strafing, over cities, towns, the countryside and highways, U.S. aircraft bombed and strafed indiscriminately. In every city and town bombs fell by chance far from any conceivable target, whether a civilian facility, military installation or military target. In the countryside random attacks were made on travelers, villagers, even Bedouins. The purpose of the attacks was to destroy life, property and terrorize the civilian population. On the highways, civilian vehicles including public buses, 47

One Apache helicopter crew member yelled “Say hello to Allah” as he launched a laserguided Hellfire

taxicabs and passenger cars were bombed and strafed at random to frighten civilians from flight, from seeking food or medical care, finding relatives or other uses of highways. The effect was summary execution and corporal punishment indiscriminately of men, women and children, young and old, rich and poor, all nationalities including the large immigrant populations. The conduct violates Protocol I Additional, Article 51.4 to the Geneva Conventions of 1977.

This is how the US pilots murdered 6. The United States intentionally bombed and destroyed Iraqi military 100,000 Iraqis personnel, used excessive force, killed soldiers seeking to surrender and in disorganized individual flight, often unarmed and far from any combat zones and randomly and wantonly killed Iraqi soldiers and destroyed materiel after the cease fire. Without significant risk to its own personnel, the U.S. led in the killing of at least 100,000 Iraqi soldiers at a cost of 148 U.S. combat casualties, according to the U.S. government. When it was determined that the civilian economy and the military were sufficiently destroyed, the U.S. ground forces moved into Kuwait and Iraq attacking disoriented, disorganized, fleeing Iraqi forces wherever they could be found, killing thousands more and destroying any equipment found. The slaughter continued after the cease fire. For example, on March 2, 1991, U.S. 24th Division Forces engaged in a four-hour assault against Iraqis just west of Basra. More than 750 vehicles were destroyed; thousands were killed without U.S. casualties. A U.S. commander said, “We really waxed them.” It was called a ‘`Turkey Shoot.” One Apache helicopter crew member yelled “Say hello to Allah” as he launched a laser-guided Hellfire missile. The conduct violated the Charter of the United Nations, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict. 7. The United States used prohibited weapons capable of mass destruction and inflicting indiscriminate death and unnecessary suffering against both military and civilian targets. Among the known illegal weapons and illegal uses of weapons employed 48

by the United States are the following: * fuel air explosives capable of widespread incineration and death; * napalm; * cluster and anti-personnel fragmentation bombs; and * “superbombs,” 2.5 ton devices, intended for assassination of government leaders. These are illegal weapons killed thousands of civilians and soldiers. The conduct violated the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter and the laws of armed conflict. 8. The United States intentionally attacked installations in Iraq containing dangerous substances and forces. The conduct violates Protocol I Additional, Article 56, to the Geneva Convention, 1977. 9. President Bush ordered U.S. forces to invade Panama, resulting in the deaths of 1,000 to 4,000 Panatnanians and the destruction of thousands of private dwellings, public buildings, and commercial structures. President Bush violated the Charter of the United Nations, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, committed crimes against peace, war crimes and violated the U.S. Constitution and numerous U.S. criminal statutes in ordering and directing the assault on Panama. 10. President Bush obstructed justice and corrupted United Nations functions as a means of securing power to commit crimes against peace and war crimes. The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitution and laws of the United States. 11. President Bush usurped the Constitutional power of Congress as a means 49

of securing power to commit crimes against peace, war crimes, and other high crimes. The conduct violates the Constitution and laws of the United States, all committed to engage in the other impeachable offenses set forth in this Complaint. 12. The United States waged war on the environment. The conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the laws of armed conflict and constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity. 13. President Bush encouraged and aided Shiite Muslims and Kurds to rebel against the government of Iraq causing fratricidal violence, emigration, exposure, hunger and sickness and thousands of deaths. After the rebellion failed, the U.S. invaded and occupied parts of Iraq without authority in order to increase division and hostility within Iraq. The conduct violated the Charter of the United Nations, international law, the Constitution and laws of the United States, and the laws of Iraq. 14. President Bush intentionally deprived the Iraqi people of essential medicines, potable water, food, and other necessities. A major component of the assault on Iraq was the systematic deprivation of essential human needs and services. To break the will of the people, destroy their economic capability, reduce their numbers and weaken their health, the United States. This conduct violates the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other covenants and constitutes a crime against humanity. 15. The United States continued its assault on Iraq after the cease fire, invading and occupying areas at will. The United States has acted with dictatorial authority over Iraq and its external relations since the end of the military conflict. It has shot and killed 50

Iraqi military personnel; destroyed aircraft and materiel at will occupy vast areas of Iraq in the north and south and consistently threatened use of force against Iraq. This conduct violates the sovereignty of a nation, exceeds authority in UN resolutions, is unauthorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and constitutes war crimes. 16. The United States has violated and condoned violations of human rights, civil liberties and the U.S. Bill of Rights in the United States, in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere to achieve its purpose of military domination. The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Constitution and laws of the United States. 17. The United States, having destroyed Iraq’s economic base, demands reparations which will permanently impoverish Iraq and threaten its people with famine and epidemic. The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitution and laws of the United States. 18. President Bush systematically manipulated, controlled, directed, misinformed and restricted press and media coverage to obtain constant support in the media for his military and political goals. This conduct violates the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is part of a pattern of conduct intended to create support for conduct constituting crimes against peace and war crimes. 19. The United States has by force secured a permanent military presence in the Gulf, the control of its oil resources and geopolitical domination of the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf region. The U.S. has committed the acts described in this complaint to create a permanent U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf, to dominate its oil resources until depleted and to maintain geopolitical domination over the 51

region. The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations, international law, and the Constitution and laws of the United States. Source: Ramsey Clark May 9, 1991

American deaths is piling up but the death of civilians and young men fighting US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan is also a sad part of the new colonialization US style.

52

Conclusions We have seen how the super powers of this world have committed severe violations of the rules and regulations set by the UN and by other bodies. We have also read in this book of the atrocious killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, civilians or soldiers, either through wars or via UN sanctions. These have motivated Tun Mahathir and the Perdana Global Peace Organization to create a War Crimes Tribunal in Kuala Lumpur. Several of the victims of the illegal war launched against Iraq by the current American administration in Washington were present at the Putra World Trade Center (PWTC) to expose the crimes perpetrated against them or against their nation. Also present were people from the occupied territory of Palestine where Israel has carried out decades of monstrous killings and the brutal elimination of young Palestinians to serve the agenda of Zionism. The World stood by and watched when the former Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, and then General of the Army attacked innocent civilians in Chabra and Shatilla in Lebanon, killing thousands. The World did nothing when the US attacked Iraq on the basis of a series of lies and as Ramsay Clarke says, with the intent to steal the nation’s resources and eliminate its leaders. The same regime is now planning attacks against 5 more Muslim nations. In an interview broadcasted on Democracy Now, a TV broadcast service in the US, General Wesley Clark who is a retired four-star general in the U.S. Army said the US had; before 911 prepared plans to attack at lest 7 Muslim countries. The General mentioned Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran as the nations to be attacked by the US in 5 years time. However, the plans seem to have gone out of kilter since the US is stuck in a Mujahideen whack in Iraq. Could 2007 be the year of major wars in the Middle East? The KLWCT should be given the credibility it deserves as it should not be seen as a noble act but as a decisive attempt to make the world realize that these wars are only causing too much pain to our modern civilization. Negotiation is the final solution to prevent wars while there is the need to create more organizations that can offer conflict resolutions to such conflicts. 53

As suggested on World Futures On Line, the webzine that is publishing this book, the KLWCT could suggest and campaign for the adoption of resolutions by the signatory states of the ICC to carry out the punishment meted to people like Bush, Blair, Olmert and Howard. They should be made persona non-grata in the countries that have adopted the ICC and they should be caught and jailed in the event they visited these countries. The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) could also take such steps and warn the warmongers from the West not to visit OIC member states. They should be told that the civilized world does not want them and they will simply be arrested, jailed and shipped back to their destination. That would deter many a warmongering leaders, who today are elected as Presidents and Prime Ministers but are in actual fact war criminals.

Killer of Children “History should remember Blair and Bush as the Killer of Children or as the Lying Prime Minister and President. What Blair and Bush had done is worse than what Saddam had done. We should not hang Blair if the Tribunal finds him guilty but he should always carry the label War Criminal, Killer of Children, Liar. And so should Bush and the pocket Bush of the bushlands of Australia (meaning John Howard).” Speech by Tun Mahathir Mohamad during the conference on War Crimes at the PWTC in Kuala Lumpur, February 2007.

54

Criminilizing war may be a daunting task Malaysia’s former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad chaired a conference-cum meeting of the newly launched anti-war tribunal under the aegis of the Perdana Global Peace Organization. The organization is campaigning for war to become a crime that is punishable by international laws. However, the task to criminalize war is monumental and the leaders targeted by the Kuala Lumpur War Crime Commission are almost untouchable. They were formally charged and sentenced for major war crimes by The Peoples Court of Christchurch in Australia in 2004. They were also charged and sentenced by an Egyptian, Philippines and a host of other such public or peoples courts across the world. Yet they are still free to visit all those countries without any arrest warrants delivered to them. This makes them bolder and untouchable On 7th February, 2007 the Kuala Lumpur War Crime Commission chaired by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad heard nine charges against US President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair as well as Australian Prime Minister John Howard for the sufferings of the people in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. There were no representatives from Afghanistan where the US and the Nato are reigning supreme. The charges against the US and its allies were presented by legal counsel on behalf of the war crimes victims, Barrister (Inner Temple) & Advocate & Solicitor High Court of Malaya, Matthias Chang before Dr Mahathir and the other five commission members at the last day of the three-day war crimes conference. Chang said Bush, Blair and Howard through a deliberate plan of deception, falsehood, forgery and outright lies misled their respective Congress and Parliament to wage war against Iraq which was a “crime against peace,” Most of the people’s tribunals heard the same accusations against the trio, though at times instead of Howard, Ariel Sharon the former Premier of Israel was included. What is different from the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission and the previous people’s war crimes courts is the processes of the war crimes tribunal and the method it will use to ‘confer’ the tag of criminal against Bush, Blair and Howard. 55

The obvious suggestion is that the KL War Crimes Commission urges the governments of the Muslim world and the friendly nations in the nonMuslim world to put the three leaders on their list of wanted war criminals, said one observer who visited the exhibition at the Putra World Trace Center (PWTC). Countries that refuse to do so will be seen as harboring criminals in the event of a visit by Bush-Blair-Howard on their soil. Once it is made clear to the three leaders they are wanted as war criminals in at least 57 Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) nations, they will not travel to these countries. This is equivalent to a travel sanction against them. Among the charges brought against the trio, the most significant is the charge regarding the lies they put forward to mislead their respective Congress and Parliaments to wage war against Iraq in 2003, which was a “crime against peace.” The Iraq invasion by the US and its allies Britain and Australia remains an illegal invasion until today. No amount of resolutions at the UN will change that. The only way to compensate the victims of the war will be formal arrest warrants against the three and their incarcerations whenever they travel to any of the nations that would support such warrant of arrests. Other than that, said the observer, the trio will make a foul of the charges and will defy the victims of their crimes by traveling to the Muslim countries – even after they leave office – in all impunity. “The KL war crimes commission would have served no purpose and would have been reduced to that of the many people’s courts we have seen since 2004,” added the observer who hails from Indonesia. Bush-Blair-Howard remains the main actors in a terrible war against Islam, a war that the West crafted right after the collapse of communism in Russia. After the fall of the wall of the wall of Berlin, it was clear that the Muslims will be targeted as the next opponent to American democracy and capitalism. The peak of the war against Islam came with the arrival of George W. Bush as President of the US thanks to a superb trick that allowed him to win despite losing to Al-Gore in numbers and percentages in national votes. 56

The KL war crimes commission has also heard charges against them for ordering the destruction of vital facilities essential to civilian lives in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine while the fourth one for the bombing of schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, residential areas, historical sites and conveniently labeling the destruction as “collateral damage”. Unfortunately they are not the last of the Western leaders that would be tempted to use cluster bomb, napalm bomb, phosporous bomb, and depleted uranium ammunition and other chemicals or heavy weaponry against Muslims. Once Bush-Blair-Howard is out of office, it will be up to the next American, British and Australian and now NATO leaders to ‘smoke the Muslims out’. Unless the KL war crimes commission is given total support by the Muslim populace world wide, by the OIC itself and other NGO’s across the Islamic world. Such support will mean a public approval of the actions of the KL war crimes commission and the total condemnation of the existing trio and the future trio to come. Dr Mahathir said the commission was to respond to several petition of war crime victims and investigate into their complaints. “We appreciate there are other tribunals but there are so many complaints, the other tribunals perhaps are not being able to hear the complaint. We feel there is a need for the setting up this tribunal (Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal) and give an opportunity for those war crimes victims to voice out their complaints and to seek redress,” he said. The commission would investigate complaints of war crimes and thereafter to submit and report to the tribunal that would be set up, which are still at a protem stage. The interesting part will be the investigation – though it is obvious that sufficient proof exist as was displayed during the concurrent exhibition held at the PWTC. There are no indications that the commission will invest itself in sending the charge sheet officially to Bush-Blair-Howard. If that is done, it will mean a step ahead in the commission’s work and a clear warning to the criminal trio, World Futures was told. Suggestions are that the killing of Saddam Hussein by the 57

Iraqi government should also be condemned as part of the war crimes committed by allies of the Bush-Blair-Howard group. Others said they hoped the exhibition on the war crimes by the US and its allies since World War 2 should be extended for another month in order to allow more people to see with their own eyes what the trio is capable of. The exhibition gives a vivid imagery of the atrocities the people of Japan, Vietnam, Iraq and Palestine went through thanks to the military attacks their countries has been subjected to by the US and its allies. It is a must to visit the exhibition. College and University students should be given a chance to see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears the terrible atrocities of the wars led by the US. Source: www.worldfutures.info

58

Stop the War An increasing number of people are calling for the end of the American occupation of Iraq. This will only be achieved if there are concerted efforts by the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), the Arab League (AL) and the United Nations (UN) with help from the EU and Russia/China. The Iraqi people has been punished enough for the US invasion of their country. It is time to set a road map for peace in Iraq. Extracted from www.worldfutures.info

59

60

Feedback Form This feedback form is or the readers of this book on War Crimes to give their opinion on the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal. Please write your comments below: Name: email address: Url: Comment:

Send it to Segatron Enterprise, 54 Mezzanine Floor, Jalan Kosas 1/5, Taman Kosas, 68000, Ampang, Selangor D.E. Malaysia or mail your comment to [email protected] 61

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Justice by the People To get your copy of this book please write to us: Segatron Enterprise, 54 Mezzanine Floor, Jalan Kosas 1/5, Taman Kosas, 68000, Ampang, Selangor D.E. Malaysia or mail your request to [email protected] In the event you wish to publish your books or newsletters or articles please write to us with details of what you intend to publish. Please visit our website: www.worldfutures.info or call 0123971261

Explaining the war crimes tribunal as proposed by the Perdana Global Peace Organization.

62