Keynes! I stand by what I said in May, and see no contradiction in what I am saying now. The NFZ was unilaterally declared by the GoSL probably as an area denial ploy. I say “probably” because there’s no way of knowing for sure, but I am of that opinion. And yes, there certainly were Tigers within the NFZ area at the time of declaration. The Tigers then moved additional heavy weapons and more troops into the NFZ after the declaration, directly endangering the civilians who were also moving in or had already done so.

Now, about your scenario. If the Tigers had declared Colombo an NFZ and the SL military had not withdrawn itself from civilian proximity or not evacuated Colombo of civilians, the SL military would be committing a warcrime by endangering civilians with their presence. If the Tigers had then attacked, the Tigers would not have been committing a crime as long as the attack could be reasonably justified as having a military benefit that was worthy of the risk placed upon the civilians by such an attack.

This is the law, regardless of whether the combat had taken place within an NFZ or without, since the NFZs had been unilaterally declared and therefore of no legal standing. So in short, it is not the place that matters, but the actions of the combatants that deems said actions criminal or not.

David,

One of your arguments above is a textbook example of a No true Scotsman fallacy. In May 2011, you argued that the NFZ was an area denial ploy by the Army and that the NFZ was declared so when the army “needed to capture an area that was heavily defended and likely to cause heavy casualties to the Army.” This means that the tigers were already in the NFZ. How then could the tigers have “followed the civilians” into the NFZ? Please explain.

Since you have taken the moral high-ground on NFZs, human shields, terrorism (and what not?), I would like you to consider a different scenario: (a) If the tigers had declared the district of Colombo as a NFZ unilaterally, would your boys have moved out?

(b) If the army hadn’t moved out and if the tigers had attacked the NFZ(in this case the Colombo!), would that amount to a war crime?

@Keynes!

Ha…ha…ha… ‘wise counsel’ by David?

I do however agree whole heartedly when you say, “What Sri Lanka needs today is a worthy successor to JM Keynes, who will have the foresight and humility to admit to mistakes of the past, and extricate this country from the mire on which it has foundered. Takers anyone?”

David,

Yes, I do read your articles and I’m a great fan of yours. Indeed, I believe your scholarship and wise counsel are second to none.

In 1919, my namesake JM Keynes referred to European history as a “perpetual prize-fight” in his magnum opus. He deemed the Treaty of Versailles as a Carthaginian Peace. What’s been happening in this island can also be referred to as a perpetual prize-fight that goes back to the time of Elara and Dutugemunu. What Sri Lanka needs today is a worthy successor to JM Keynes, who will have the foresight and humility to admit to mistakes of the past, and extricate this country from the mire on which it has foundered. Takers anyone?

Keynes!!! I see you’ve been reading my articles 🙂 Yes, as I said over a year ago, the NFZs have no legal standing and were probably just an area denial strategy. However, if that is so, no one was afforded any special protection in lieu of being within the NFZ’s perimeter, thereby dissolving Patriots’s points list. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. The civilians were told they would be safe in the NFZ, and they would have been if the Tigers had withdrawn. IHL requires combatants to remove themselves from civilians or prevent civilians getting into proximity of combatants. Pretty much the opposite of what the Tigers did. In fact, they moved further troops and heavy weapons into the NFZ after the civilians had moved there.

This report is a cover up strategy by the Rajapakse regime and people all over the world demand for an independent international war crimes investigation.

We all know the alleged criminals are in power and the Sinhala Apartheid Buddhist regime has been committing crimes against humanity and now it is the time for accountability and justice.

Keynes!, Please read and engage with A robust debate on No Fire Zones (NFZs) and International Humanitarian Law: Artful dodging of war crimes in Sri Lanka?, http://groundviews.org/2011/05/26/a-robust-debate-on-no-fire-zones-nfzs-and-international-humanitarian-law-artful-dodging-of-war-crimes-in-sri-lanka/

David Blacker,

Your reference to the LTTE following the civilians into the NFZ on point 3 is debatable since the NFZs that were declared were the areas in which the LTTE was already present. Let me refresh your memory:

The declaration of the NFZs was an area denial ploy by the SL military. When they needed to capture an area that was heavily defended and likely to cause heavy casualties to the Army, it was declared an NFZ. Once this was done, the Tigers were forced to withdraw from the area and allow the Army to walk in, or defend it and risk being accused of fighting from within the NFZ and causing civilian casualties. Legally, the NFZs have no standing as they were unilaterally declared by the MoD without the agreement of the Tigers. Safe areas, cease fires, truces, etc must be agreed upon by both warring parties to be legitimate. Therefore, neither attacking the NFZs nor defending them are war crimes per se.