戰爭有章法，不能亂來 There are laws of war

戰爭有章法，不能亂來  There are laws of war

為欺敵避敵，海軍計劃以10年316億元預算，新建60艘外型如遊艇，並採用一般民間塗裝的微型飛彈突擊艇。

To cheat and attack the enemy, ROC Navy is trying to spend 10 billion more USD in ten years to establish 60 camouflage missile assault boats.  Their appearance will be similar to civilian resort boats. 

偽裝為民船的飛彈突擊艇，與平時各自捕魚、運輸，戰時接受輔助戰鬥任務的總動員完全不同—它不是戰術欺敵，既無軍事必要性(military necessity)，且違反1907年海牙第7公約第2條「外部標示」，1977年〈日內瓦第四公約〉第37.1條「禁止背信棄義」與第44.3條「必須與平民區別」等規定[1]，不可輕率為之。

Civilian resort like Missile assault boats is different from the general mobilization of wartime, during which the civilian boats will be mobilized to support the auxiliary military mission.  However, the camouflage missile assault boats are neither tactical deception, nor the military necessity.  What is more, the idea at least violatesbesic rules of the laws of war such as :

1.  the obligation of bearing the external marks in the Article 3 of the “Conversion of Merchant Ships into War Ships, or the seventh Hague Conventions” of 1907;

2.  the obligation of “the feigning of civilian, non-combatant status” in Article 37.1“Prohibition of Perfidy”; and

3.  the obligation of the combatants are obliged “to distinguish themselves from the civilian population” in the Combatants and prisoners of war of Article 44 of the “Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)” of 1977.

戰爭雖是政治學理中暴力的極致，卻非毫無章法。從1863年美國〈李伯法典〉(Lieber Code)、1868年〈聖彼得堡宣言〉、1899到1907年〈海牙公約〉[2]、1949與1977年〈日內瓦公約〉，兩個世紀以來，旨在戰爭中保護平民、禁止無端殺戮的戰爭法（現稱國際人道法）體系逐漸完備；[3] 國際紅十字會體系也伴隨成長。

Though war is the utmost form of violence in the political science, yet war is not something at will.  The laws of war, or the International humanitarian laws, are from the US Lieber Code of 1863, the Declaration of St. Petersburg of 1868, the Hague Conventions from 1899 to 1907, and the Geneva Convention of 1949 and 1977 among others.  Now the system, aiming at protecting the civilians and prohibiting unnecessary killings in war time, are near completed following the evolution of the International Commission of the Red Cross.

戰爭法雖承認交戰團體權利，條件是「為下屬負有指揮責任的人員；在遠距離即可辨識之固定標誌；公開攜帶武器；實施符合戰爭法與戰爭習慣法之行動」。此等人員，若行為合法，便得接受戰爭法保護，享受如戰俘等權益；否則，甚至會被視為刑事犯，如傭兵就與受雇殺人無異。

The laws of war recognize the rights of the belligerents.  However, there are conditions to be the belligerent:

1.  To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

2.  To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;

3.  To carry arms openly; and

4.  To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war..

Those personnel who meet the criterion and act legally will be protected by the law, such as enjoy the rights as POWs.  On the contrary, the one will be seen as criminal, such as mercenary is seen as the crime of pay-to-kill.

前近代戰爭思想混淆了軍民界線，將偷襲、偽裝等當成高智慧；但現代軍隊，講究在行動前謹慎討論適法性。適法與否，將成為戰後外交談判或法庭的攻防的籌碼。從紐倫堡大審到東京大審，國際社會已建立國際刑事法庭制度，沒必要或毫無章法殺戮，戰後相關個人將接受追訴。電影《驚爆內幕》(The Insider)結尾，特別提及國務院的「戰爭罪事務署」(Office of War Crimes Issues)[4][5] 與其追訴無期限之事實。

The pre-modern thought of warfare mixed up the difference between civil and military.  They highly valued sneak raid, camouflage etc. as wisdom.  But the modern armed forces care about the legitimacy of operation.  The legitimacy will be the stacks of diplomatic negotiation, or the evidences in the court after the end of war.  From The Nuremberg trials of 1945-1946 and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East of 1946-1948, the International community has establish the International Criminal Court to judge the persons who are commit unnecessary killing or no mercy.  At the final part of the movie “The Insider,” the actress took out a business card of the Office of War Crimes Issues, US Department of State, which renamed to the Office of Global Criminal Justice in 2012, and showed us that there is no criminal retrospective limit of time referring the war crime.

混淆軍與民界線，也是對人民殘忍。1937年南京，只有前近代水準的國民黨指揮官，見無法抵擋日軍，不是依法投降，反而「一念之仁」的要官兵自謀生活。日軍進城，見堆積如山的軍服，不見軍人與槍械，直覺每位平民無異潛在的槍手、炸彈客，對安全威脅極大。是否因此過度殺戮很難論斷，但戰鬥進行的方式受到國際法管轄一事，從未被我們認真討論過。

Mixing up the line of the civil and the military could be fatal to civilians.  The KMT commander, who possessed only the pre-modern knowledge of war, asked his subordinates to flee away, not to surrender, when he saw the defeat was inevitable in Nanking, 1937.  This was a real mercy decision a commander could had by his pre-modern thinking.  The Japanese troop entered Nanking, seeing the piles of uniforms but no soldier and no weapons, felt extreme fear for anyone in the city could be shooters and bombers.  We did not know if the situation triggered the massacre.  But we know that the aspect of the laws of war has never been discussed in studying war history.

1990年代初，為使解放軍脫離「利用人民的非正規戰法」，國際紅十字會專家教授整套戰爭法課程。現在海軍居然要與解放軍比低級？茲事體大，國防部在定案前，最好先諮詢法律事務司幕僚！

To modernize PLA, the ICRC experts gave lectures in early 1990s.  Now ROC Navy is pulling back its level of the civilization or humanity?  The leaders of the Minister of National Defense ROC had better consult with the staffs of the Department of Legal Affairs before the final decision is made,

〈海牙第四公約附錄〉第一節：交戰團體　■雲程譯

〈海牙第四公約附錄〉第二節：交戰方式　雲程譯

〈海牙第四公約附錄〉第三節：敵意地區的軍事當局　雲程譯

---

[1]  https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/ART/470-750046?OpenDocument   

[2]  http://blog.xuite.net/hoonting/twblog/160091510   

[3]  https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl   

[4]  該署在2012年改為「全球刑事正義署」(Office of Global Criminal Justice)，但2017年Tillerson卻想要將之裁撤解編。http://www.thehagueinstituteforglobaljustice.org/latest-insights/latest-insights/news-brief/statement-of-former-us-ambassador-stephen-rapp-on-the-proposed-elimination-of-the-office-of-global-criminal-justice/

[5]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Global_Criminal_Justice       https://www.state.gov/j/gcj/index.htm    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-state-department-war-crimes-office-genocide-investigate-and-prevent-rex-tillerson-todd-a7846756.html