As the war in Iraq has moved into a more intense phase of combat, Iraqi forces have apparently adopted a series of guerrilla tactics designed to counteract the superior might of the U.S. and British armies. U.S. and British military spokesman have told of a number of different actions taken by the Iraqi army and irregular forces, which Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke collectively described as “deadly deception.”

These include: feigning surrender before opening fire on U.S. or allied troops; militiamen fighting in civilian clothes; and basing military equipment in hospitals or other civilian areas.

Most of these reported actions would be breaches of international humanitarian law.

On Tuesday March 25, Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “Some of the biggest losses we have taken are due to Iraqis committing serious violations of the law of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions, by dressing as civilians and luring us into surrender situations and opening fire on our troops.”

Among other reported incidents, according to Central Command officials quoted by UPI on Sunday March 23, an Iraqi military unit faked surrender to U.S. Marines but opened fire as the U.S. forces approached near Nasiriya.

Two days later, U.S. forces seized a hospital in Nasiriya that was apparently being used as a base by Iraqi fighters. It was reported that Marines confiscated 200 weapons and more than 3,000 chemical suits from the building, as well as capturing nearly 170 Iraqi soldiers. Col. Ron Johnson, an operations officer with the Marines, told CNN that they believed that Iraqi fighters dressed as civilians were being transported into the Iraqi city of Nasiriya to stage attacks on U.S. forces there.

In Nasiriya and other cities, U.S. and British troops have met stiff resistance from irregular groups of fighters – said to be a mix of Iraqi army troops, Ba’ath party officials and militiamen from the Fedayeen Saddam. Marines quoted in the New York Times described the fighters as “using civilians as shields,” “pushing women and children into the streets,” and “leaping out of buses and taxis” to shoot at U.S. troops.

These apparent guerrilla tactics can be broken down into a series of specific allegations:

• Feigning surrender as an act of war. According to H. Wayne Elliott, former chief of the international law division at the Judge Advocate General’s School of the U.S. Army, “pretending to surrender is a traditional war crime.” Under the 1907 Hague Conventions, it is especially forbidden “to make improper use of a flag of truce.” In the first Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1977, feigning surrender was defined as perfidy: “Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy.” (Although neither the United States nor Iraq has signed Additional Protocol I, this provision is generally recognized as a statement of customary law.)
  
  The statute of the International Criminal Court includes both “making improper use of the flag of truce” and “killing or wounding treacherously” as war crimes. Although neither the U.S. nor Iraq is a party to the Court, its list of crimes is widely regarded as an authoritative summary of current legal thinking.
  
  
• Soldiers fighting in civilian clothes. It is a long-established principle of international humanitarian law that – in addition to the uniformed armed forces of a state – irregulars, militias and volunteer corps, are entitled to take part in hostilities, provided that they meet certain criteria. (See Geneva Convention III, Article 4.) These criteria include having a clear chain of command, carrying their weapons openly, and having “a fixed distinctive sign recognisable at a distance” so that they can be identified as combatants, not civilians.
  
  Members of the Fedayeen militia are sometimes described as wearing black masks and headscarves, which might qualify as a recognisable emblem, if they clearly set militia members apart from the general population.
  
  According to H. Wayne Elliott, soldiers who remove their uniforms to fight would be committing a breach of the customary laws of war through “failure to distinguish themselves from the civilian population.”
  
  The first Additional Protocol of 1977 does introduce an exception to this rule for guerrilla warfare (which was seen by many nations during the 1960’s and 1970’s as a valid and appropriate means of fighting for national liberation). According to the Protocol, guerrillas need not wear distinctive uniforms, but must carry their arms openly during military deployment prior to the launching of an attack, and during all military engagements. This provision is extremely controversial – the United States decided not to become a party to the Additional Protocol in large part because it objected to this aspect of the treaty. (Other countries such as Britain believe it is only applicable in occupied territory or national liberation movements.) Neither is Iraq a party to Additional Protocol I, so it would not seem to be applicable in this conflict.
  
  
• Using medical facilities as a cover for military operations. It is a violation of the laws of war to use hospitals or medical emblems “in an attempt to shield military objectives from attack.” (The language is from Additional Protocol I, but this is recognized as part of customary international law, and therefore binding even on states that are not party to the Protocol.)
  
  
• Locating military forces in populated areas. According to A.P.V. Rogers, a former British Army officer now based at Cambridge University and author of Law on the Battlefield, the laws of war “contain a general exhortation to defenders to avoid locating their forces in populated areas.” The relevant language is from Article 58 of Additional Protocol I: “The Parties to the conflict shall, to the maximum extent feasible…avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas.” (Again, this is recognized as an expression of customary international law.) However, the imprecise nature of the provision (“to the maximum extent feasible…”) makes it difficult to see this Article as the basis for accusing Iraqi fighters of a breach of the law.
  
  
• Using civilians as human shields. This is a violation of the first Additional Protocol, and of the customary laws of war. (See Article 51: “The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.”
  
  Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, it is a war crime to use “the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations.”
  
  Back to Top