[IMMUNE OR SOFT TARGET? THE BOMBING OF OTTOMAN HOSPITALS].

Oya Dağlar Macar
{"title":"[IMMUNE OR SOFT TARGET? THE BOMBING OF OTTOMAN HOSPITALS].","authors":"Oya Dağlar Macar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>World War I was one of the worst wars in terms of human rights violations. The then valid Geneva and La Haye Conventions were ignored by most of the involved states, and serious war crimes were committed. The most serious human rights violations included the following: confiscating, bombing or impeding in their function the hospitals of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, as well as their hospital ships, healthcare workers, vehicles and supplies; mistreating prisoners of war; using prohibited weapons or poison gas; and directly or indirectly killing or violating the right to life of uninvolved civilians. Throughout the entire war, Red Cross and Red Crescent hospitals were bombed in an attempt to prevent the healthcare workers' activities, even though both the Geneva and La Haye Conventions had granted them \"immunity\" and accepted them as \"neutral.\" The motivation behind these actions was to damage and destroy the enemy's logistic channels and to inflict psychological harm. The enemy wanted to create the worst possible shock and fear by bombing hospitals and clinics considered \"soft targets\"; by doing so, it attempted to break the other army's morale and break its determination to continue the war. These crimes-which today are openly accepted as war crimes-were greatly assisted by the facts that the conventions lacked any binding statutes concerning breaches and that their enforcement remained very limited. Although at the end of the war a commission was brought to life with the aim to punish was crimes, Germany was held responsible for the war, leading to war crime convictions being limited to this state only. No international court was established to adjudicate and punish war crimes in general. This article examines the correspondence between the Ottoman state and the Red Crescent concerning the Entente Powers' attacks on Ottoman hospitals during World War I and the ensuing human rights violations, in the light of records from the Prime Ministry's Ottoman Archives and Red Crescent Archive.</p>","PeriodicalId":83561,"journal":{"name":"Yeni tip tarihi arastirmalari = The new history of medicine studies","volume":" 20","pages":"11-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yeni tip tarihi arastirmalari = The new history of medicine studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

World War I was one of the worst wars in terms of human rights violations. The then valid Geneva and La Haye Conventions were ignored by most of the involved states, and serious war crimes were committed. The most serious human rights violations included the following: confiscating, bombing or impeding in their function the hospitals of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, as well as their hospital ships, healthcare workers, vehicles and supplies; mistreating prisoners of war; using prohibited weapons or poison gas; and directly or indirectly killing or violating the right to life of uninvolved civilians. Throughout the entire war, Red Cross and Red Crescent hospitals were bombed in an attempt to prevent the healthcare workers' activities, even though both the Geneva and La Haye Conventions had granted them "immunity" and accepted them as "neutral." The motivation behind these actions was to damage and destroy the enemy's logistic channels and to inflict psychological harm. The enemy wanted to create the worst possible shock and fear by bombing hospitals and clinics considered "soft targets"; by doing so, it attempted to break the other army's morale and break its determination to continue the war. These crimes-which today are openly accepted as war crimes-were greatly assisted by the facts that the conventions lacked any binding statutes concerning breaches and that their enforcement remained very limited. Although at the end of the war a commission was brought to life with the aim to punish was crimes, Germany was held responsible for the war, leading to war crime convictions being limited to this state only. No international court was established to adjudicate and punish war crimes in general. This article examines the correspondence between the Ottoman state and the Red Crescent concerning the Entente Powers' attacks on Ottoman hospitals during World War I and the ensuing human rights violations, in the light of records from the Prime Ministry's Ottoman Archives and Red Crescent Archive.

[免疫还是软目标?轰炸奥斯曼医院]。
就侵犯人权而言,第一次世界大战是最严重的战争之一。当时有效的《日内瓦公约》和《拉海公约》被大多数当事国所忽视,犯下了严重的战争罪行。最严重的侵犯人权行为包括:没收、轰炸或妨碍红十字会和红新月会医院及其医院船、保健工作人员、车辆和用品的运作;虐待战俘;使用违禁武器或者毒气的;并直接或间接杀害或侵犯无关平民的生命权。在整个战争期间,红十字会和红新月会医院遭到轰炸,企图阻止医护人员的活动,尽管《日内瓦公约》和《拉海耶公约》都给予它们"豁免权",并接受它们"中立"地位。这些行动背后的动机是破坏和摧毁敌人的后勤通道,并造成心理伤害。敌人想通过轰炸被认为是“软目标”的医院和诊所来制造最严重的震惊和恐惧;通过这样做,它试图打破对方军队的士气,打破对方继续战争的决心。这些罪行——今天已被公开承认为战争罪行——由于公约缺乏关于违反行为的有约束力的法规,而且公约的执行仍然非常有限,这在很大程度上助长了这些罪行。尽管在战争结束时成立了一个旨在惩罚其罪行的委员会,但德国被认为对战争负有责任,导致战争罪的定罪仅限于该国。没有设立任何国际法庭来审判和惩罚一般的战争罪行。本文根据总理的奥斯曼档案馆和红新月档案馆的记录,审查了奥斯曼国家与红新月会之间关于第一次世界大战期间协约国袭击奥斯曼医院以及随后发生的侵犯人权行为的通信。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信