5cjxburmr

lives are valued by the adversary in order to induce the adversary not to attack, but is alsounderstood to include the prohibition against using hostages as human shields. 407The taking of hostages is also prohibited in non-international armed conflict. 4085.16.4 Violations by Defenders Do Not Relieve Attackers of the Duty to Discriminate inConducting Attacks. Violations by the adversary of the prohibition on using protected personsand objects to shield, favor, or impede military operations do not relieve those conducting attacksfrom their obligation to seek to discriminate between lawful and unlawful objects of attack. 409However, such violations by the adversary may impair the attacking force’s ability todiscriminate and increase the risk of harm to protected persons and objects. 4105.17 SEIZURE AND DESTRUCTION OF ENEMY PROPERTYOutside the context of attacks, certain rules apply to the seizure and destruction of enemyproperty:• Enemy property may not be seized or destroyed unless imperatively demanded by thenecessities of war;knowingly seized or detained one or more persons, threatens to kill, injure, or continue to detain such person orpersons with the intent of compelling any nation, person other than the hostage, or group of persons to act or refrainfrom acting as an explicit or implicit condition for the safety or release of such person or persons, shall be punished,if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission under thischapter may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as amilitary commission under this chapter may direct.”).407 GC COMMENTARY 230 (giving as examples of hostage taking: (1) “taking as hostages persons generally selectedfrom among prominent persons in a city or a district in order to prevent disorders or attacks on occupation troops”;(2) “arresting after an attack a certain number of inhabitants of the occupied territory and announcing that they willbe kept captive or executed if the guilty are not given up”; and (3) “the practice of taking so-called accompanyinghostages consists of placing inhabitants of occupied territory on board lorry convoys or trains in order to preventattacks by their compatriots”).408 Refer to § 17.6.2 (Prohibition on the Taking of Hostages).409 Refer to § 5.5.4 (Failure by the Defender to Separate or Distinguish Does Not Relieve the Attacker of the Duty toDiscriminate in Conducting Attacks).410 FINAL REPORT ON THE PERSIAN GULF WAR 613 (“Another reason for collateral damage to civilian objects andinjury to civilians during Operation Desert Storm lay in the policy of the Government of Iraq, which purposely usedboth Iraqi and Kuwaiti civilian populations and civilian objects as shields for military objects. Contrary to theadmonishment against such conduct contained in Article 19, GWS, Articles 18 and 28, GC, Article 4(1), 1954Hague, and certain principles of customary law codified in Protocol I (discussed below), the Government of Iraqplaced military assets (personnel, weapons, and equipment) in civilian populated areas and next to protected objects(mosques, medical facilities, and cultural sites) in an effort to protect them from attack. For this purpose, Iraqimilitary helicopters were dispersed into residential areas; and military supplies were stored in mosques, schools, andhospitals in Iraq and Kuwait. Similarly, a cache of Iraqi Silkworm surface-to-surface missiles was found inside aschool in a populated area in Kuwait City. UN inspectors uncovered chemical bomb production equipment whileinspecting a sugar factory in Iraq. The equipment had been moved to the site to escape Coalition air strikes. Thisintentional mingling of military objects with civilian objects naturally placed the civilian population living nearby,working within, or using those civilian objects at risk from legitimate military attacks on those military objects.”).261