Here's an odd thing.
In discussing the war it seems almost everyone agrees that a soldier who commits a war crime is culpable. If he knowingly shoots a civilian for example, even when ordered to by a superior, he commits a crime. But almost nobody seems to think that a soldier should be held personally accountable for the worse crime known as a crime against the peace, by which I mean the particpation in a criminal war itself. Why is this?
Let me briefly say that some have suggested that soldiers are not subject to the law of crime against the peace. They suggest that the intent of the law is to punish leaders who go to war illegally, but not punish the soldiers who make the war possible. This isn't a legal discussion; the question is whether participating in a criminal war
ought to be considered as immoral as participation in a war crime.
I also don't want to suggest that leaders are not the main guilty party in a crime against the peace. A commander who orders a war crime is guilty too. So are the soldiers who carry out the orders.
Thirdly let me emphasis this is a discussion about a war that is known to be illegal (by the soldier) and a war crime that is known by the soldier to be such.
Why is this dichotomy so extreme? How extreme? Well in discussion I got the impression that a soldier who was asked if they would follow an order to commit a war crime, was almost insulted that I would ask. If I asked about participating in a war that was known to be illegal, the implication was that I was insulting soldiers for the opposite reason - for suggesting they should not commit the deed when I ought to understand how hard it would be to refuse.
This is especially odd because
- the crime of aggression is the worse crime
- refusal of orders has the same legal basis in both cases
- refusing to go to war happens at home, not under battle conditions
- refusal to go to war will not endanger your life or the lives of your unit by creating divisions
Why is it shameful to obey an order to participate in an act which will kill a handfull of civlians during the intensity of war, but perfectly understandable to go along with orders to participate in an enterprise that will result in the deaths of many thousands of civilains, at a time when you are calm and safe?
(obligatory poll follows)