| WASHINGTON
- May 18 - Following the NATO bombing of Korisa which killed at least 79 civilians,
Amnesty International said today that the reported presence of legitimate military
objectives in the village does not absolve NATO of its responsibility under international
humanitarian law to take all possible precautions to avoid harming civilians.
NATO has stated that its
attack on Korisa was aimed at legitimate military targets including an armoured
personnel carrier and artillery pieces and that it selected these targets based
on up-to-date intelligence. But the number of civilian vehicles hit and civilian
casualties raises serious doubts about the quality of the intelligence and whether
this objective's military value was proportionate to the risk to civilians.
If civilians in the area
were being used as human shields by Yugoslav forces this would constitute a breach
of international humanitarian law, but in that case, an attack by NATO would have
been disproportionate and therefore also unlawful.
Amnesty International has
written repeatedly to NATO to express concern as to whether earlier incidents
may have been unlawful attacks. These incidents include: the 12 April bombing
of a rail road bridge which struck a passenger train and killed at least 10 civilians;
the attacks on the refugee convoys near Djakovica on 14 April which killed as
many as 72 civilians; the 23 April attack on Serbian state television headquarters
in Belgrade in which 15 civilians were killed; the bombing on 1 May of a bridge
near Luzane which struck a passenger bus and killed 23 people; the 7 May bombing
of a civilian market and hospital in Ni during which 15 civilians were killed;
and the bombing on 8 May of the Chinese embassy which killed three civilians.
Following each of these
attacks, Amnesty International wrote to NATO Secretary General Javier Solana with
specific questions about the adherence of NATO forces fundamental rules of humanitarian
law. These include the prohibition of direct attacks on civilians and civilian
objects and the prohibition of attacks on military targets expected to cause incidental
loss of civilian life "which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and
direct military advantage anticipated." Other rules require specific precautions
to be taken when launching attacks, including desisting from an attack if it becomes
apparent that the objective is not a military one or the attack risks being disproportionate.
Amnesty International has
expressed concern that these incidents may indicate that not all precautions are
being taken to protect civilians because priority is being given to ensuring pilots'
safety. Amnesty International has raised concerns as to whether NATO is taking
sufficient precautions in selecting and vetting targets, in choosing the timing
of these attacks, in the manner in which these attacks are being executed, and
whether civilians are being given advance warning when possible.
Amnesty International has
not received relevant details of the rules of engagement and other relevant instructions
from NATO, which it has repeatedly requested in order to allow an assessment as
to whether they comply with international humanitarian law. NATO has given general
assurances that every effort to avoid civilian casualties is being made but has
not provided Amnesty International with substantive answers to its questions on
specific incidents.
###
|
Share This Article With A Friend