Robin Fleming
In this third and final part of ‘A Deeper Look’ I want to analyse another contemporary instance of blatant and unabashed war crimes being committed by another signatory of the Geneva Conventions, who is also subject to International Humanitarian Law (IHL). That signatory is Turkey, and though it has been receiving less media attention in the shadow of recent events in Israel and Palestine, Turkish armed forces have also been conducting a military campaign that is intentionally and primarily targeting infrastructure in Kurdish-majority regions of North and East Syria (NES).
This is according to Turkey’s own claims. On 4 October, Hakan Fidan, the Turkish foreign minister, warned at the start of the recent operations that, “From now on, all infrastructure, superstructure facilities and energy facilities belonging to PKK/YPG in Iraq and Syria are the legitimate target of our security forces”.
This statement refers to the PKK, or the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, and the YPG, the Peoples’ Protection Units.
Turkey considers the PKK, which has its root in southern Turkey, a terrorist organisation, and further more claims that a number of Syrian Kurdish political, civil and military groups are one and the same as the PKK. The YPG, a group led by Syrian Kurds who worked in coordination with the global coalition against ISIS to defeat the terrorist group, have been particularly maligned by Turkey who also refers to them as terrorists.
Fidan then continued his warning: “I recommend that third parties stay away from PKK/YPG facilities and individuals.”
There is a lot to unpack there. Firstly, it is bizarre a government official such as Fidan would publicly announce his intention to militarily target “infrastructure”, as it is directly prohibited by Article 54 of IHL. Keep in mind, even if as he claims, these facilities are owned by the PKK or YPG, if the facilities are relied on for nonmilitary purposes and to supply water and food stuffs to civilian populations, this is irrefutably a war crime. If the destruction of these facilities leads to ‘starvation or forced displacement’ then Turkeys actions constitute a war crime. Fidan essentially acknowledges civilians could potentially be harmed by the targeting of infrastructure facilities when he warns “third parties to stay away”. Those third party people are civilians. And it is not a civilian’s duty to avoid being in proximity to a bakery, for example, where they may need to buy bread. According to Rule 1 of International Law, the responsibility is on the “armed parties” of a conflict to “distinguish between civilian and combatant”, not on the civilian to make themselves more distinguishable.
The narratives we see at play here are so eerily similar to the narratives Israel is using. Firstly, painting an entire population as equal to one militant group: in Israel’s case Hamas and in Turkey’s the PKK. Secondly, both put responsibility on the civilian to distance themselves from the militant group and claim their hands are clean if there are any casualties. Israel does this by claiming any dead civilian was being used as a ‘human shield’ and so they are not to blame, and Turkey does this by telling ‘third parties’ to steer clear of any infrastructure, even those necessary for sustenance and life, which Turkey deems tainted.
Now that we know what Turkey threatened to do, let’s look at what it’s done and the disastrous affects it’s had on the people of NES. Both ReliefWeb, a humanitarian information service, and the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) have published reports detailing the damage sustained since Turkey began its new bombardment campaign in the beginning of October.
The comprehensive report from the AANES reveals that Turkish armed forces carried out as many as 304 strikes between 4 and 10 October, hitting 224 locations in NES. These strikes consisted of artillery, mortars, drones and airstrikes. According to the report, in this period of time, significant damage was done to power plants, medical centres, oil facilities, industrial areas and also caused “significant material damage” to the vicinity of a number of camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs). In this time, 47 people were killed, and at least 55 injured. Tragically, these numbers are only rising since 10 October.
Next I turn to the ReliefWeb report, published 16 October, which lays out the exact extent of the damage, and more importantly the expected impact on the civilian population. For example, the report includes a graphic showing that prior to the Turkish airstrikes, 51.4 percent of electricity needs were able to be supplied from Tabqa Dam, Swediyeh, and Jebsa. After the Turkish airstrikes, the productivity of all of these electricity stations fell dramatically. Meaning now 88.6 percent of the population can not have their needs met. The report says: “With this, only 11 percent of Hasakah governorate’s electricity needs are being met. Some areas — including those reliant on damaged transfer stations — are entirely without electricity.”
This impacts every aspect of daily life. The severe lack of electricity will drastically reduce access to clean and safe water. The Alouk water station was reliant on electricity from one of the damaged stations. Now Alouk is not operational, impacting more than 610,000 civilians in Hasakah and the surrounding areas.
A water station providing drinking water to the Malikiyah subdistrict only has access to approximately three hours of electricity per day according to ReliefWeb. As a result, the station is only about to provide water to 12 percent of the city’s population. This is just one of six water stations the report mentioned as having been damaged.
I will take the time now to remind you of the second point in Article 54 of IHL. “It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as… drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works.” Turkey’s actions, within such a short time frame, impacted hundreds of thousands of civilians’ access to water in just one region of NES. It is not within Hakan Fidan’s power to declare that this infrastructure is now a “legitimate target” as he tried to do on 4 October, no matter what he says, Turkeys actions are demonstrably in violation with both the spirit and letter of IHL.
As heartbreaking as seeing this destruction on any civilian area is, as we see in Gaza and in NES, what makes it even worse is the complete failure of other signatories of the Geneva Convention, and other countries sworn to uphold the principles of international humanitarian law to prevent these violations from occurring. Civilian causalities have become so normalised in modern warfare, all an aggressor needs is to blame the civilians themselves for their proximity to “legitimate targets”. What is clear is that we need a renewal of commitment to the principle of IHL. We, the international community, need to re-imagine it and strengthen it so it is not so easy to ignore the cries and the suffering of innocent civilians.
A Deeper Look: Why International Law Failed to Prevent Harm to Civilians – Part 1
A Deeper Look: Why International Law Failed to Prevent Harm to Civilians – Part 2
Robin Fleming is an American Researcher who worked with the Rojava Information Centre and specialises in North and East Syria.
