Turkey Violates International Humanitarian Law in Iraqi Kurdistan, Renowned Law Expert Says

13-09-2024 03:11
On September 4, 2024, a Turkish drone strike targeted this vehicle near Sulaimanyah's Khalkan, resulting in the deaths of a father and his two sons.

Peregraf – Renwar Najm

Turkey's military actions in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, which have resulted in the deaths of nine Kurdish civilians within two weeks, constitute violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), according to a renowned international law expert.

By targeting civilians and noncombatants in areas far from the frontlines of its conflict with the PKK, including recent drone strikes near Sulaymaniyah, Turkey is breaching IHL norms that protect civilian lives during armed conflicts, the expert told Peregraf, highlighting the severe legal and humanitarian implications of these actions.

From August 23 to September 5, nine Kurdish civilians have been killed due to Turkish military actions in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, including eight in drone strikes across three incidents and one from bombardment.

While frontline clashes between the Turkish army and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) fighters are primarily concentrated in the border areas of Duhok province, recent drone strikes have shifted focus to the surroundings of Sulaymaniyah, a civilian region located hundreds of kilometers away from the Turkish border.

"The targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure is a violation of the IHL," Professor Gabor Rona of Practice at Cardozo Law School told Peregraf, "as is the unintended harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure resulting even from attacks against legitimate military objectives, if that harm is disproportionate to the military advantage gained by such attacks."

This conflict is a long-standing and complex struggle between Turkey and the PKK, a Kurdish militant group seeking greater autonomy and rights for Kurds in Turkey. The conflict began in 1984 and has since claimed tens of thousands of lives, involving guerrilla warfare, military operations, and a cycle of retaliatory attacks. Turkey considers the PKK a terrorist organization and has conducted extensive military campaigns against it, including airstrikes and ground operations in southeastern Turkey and cross-border incursions into the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, where most of the PKK fighters are based.

Despite Turkey's expansion of military operations beyond its borders, the conflict between Turkey and the PKK is classified under international law as a non-international armed conflict (NIAC), not an international armed conflict (IAC). This distinction is based on the nature of the parties involved, rather than the geographic scope of the conflict. A conflict between a state and a non-state armed group, even if it extends across international boundaries, remains a NIAC because one of the parties is a non-state actor.

Professor Rona, who previously served as the International Legal Director of Human Rights First, a New York-based international human rights organization, states that the Turkey/PKK conflict is governed by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL), also known as the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC).

Turkey is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), "violations of IHL by Turkey in its military activities against the PKK may also constitute violations of Turkey's human rights law obligations under these treaties," states the law expert, adding "complaints related to ICCPR treaty obligations may be brought to the Human Rights Committee. Complaints related to ECHR obligations may be brought to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)."

The other party in the conflict has also committed to adhering to international conventions. On January 24, 1995, the PKK issued a statement to the United Nations, pledging to respect the Geneva Conventions and treat captured Turkish military personnel as prisoners of war (PoWs). In 2011, the PKK further reinforced these commitments by issuing its Rules for the Conduct of Hostilities, which included principles such as distinguishing between civilians and combatants, avoiding civilian targets, and ensuring humane treatment for non-combatants. The PKK also emphasized the protection of children and the humane treatment of the wounded, regardless of their affiliation. Nevertheless, international human rights watchdogs have alleged that the PKK has violated the Geneva Conventions to which it is a signatory.

Community Peacemaker Teams (CPT), a US-based human rights organization and conflict monitor, have documented 702 civilian casualties (344 killed and 358 injured) resulting from Turkish military operations in Iraqi Kurdistan between January 1, 1991, and June 30, 2024. Civilian casualties decreased in the mid-2000s after high numbers in the 1990s but have risen significantly since 2018. From 2018 to 2024, Turkey's military actions, especially the 'Claw' operations, accounted for 39% of all civilian casualties reported since 1991. The Turkish military claims that its operations target various Kurdish armed groups, including the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and its affiliates such as the Party of Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), the Sinjar Resistance Units (YBS), and the Yezidi Protection Force (HPE).

In most cases, Turkey has either claimed responsibility for the strikes or not denied allegations implicating them, asserting that their targets were PKK fighters or former noncombatant members of the PKK. While Turkey has successfully targeted several PKK fighters and leaders through drone strikes, the targeting of civilians beyond its borders remains indisputable. Notably, Turkey has not issued apologies for these incidents, even when the casualties have included children.

Professor Rona emphasizes that targeting noncombatants always constitutes a violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), regardless of location. However, when Turkey conducts hostilities in Iraq without Iraq's consent, it does not necessarily violate IHL, as this issue falls outside its scope. Nonetheless, such actions could violate Iraq's sovereignty and, therefore, international law. "This ‘could be’ because, since the post-9/11 era, some states, like the U.S., have argued that they can conduct hostilities in other states without consent if the state is ‘unwilling or unable’ to control non-state actors on its territory that have attacked them. However, but many States do not agree with this theory."