It is one of the basic tenets of war based on The Geneva Convention in 1949 and reworked in 1977 by 174 countries and it deals with the treatment accorded to prisoners of war. It provides a modicum of protection for a combatant in uniform and allows for his life to be a responsibility of his captors. Lt. Muaz Alkassasbeh of the Royal Jordanian Air Force is a prisoner of war under this protocol but will the ISIS see it as such?
In fact, Article 42 outlaws attacks on pilots and crew in distress. The law states that once they have landed in territory controlled by an adverse party they must be given an opportunity to surrender with dignity commensurate with their official status.
Commissioned men and women on military duty or on missions are to be treated with respect but it is a matter of concern if the IS intend to see this. There is something very uncomfortable about parading a human being as if he was a trophy. The pilot was only doing his duty and following the orders of his nation. He is only an instrument and while he may be a bargaining chip in the near future he must be detained without humiliation or risk to his life.
One of the ironies of the convention as seen in Articles 43 and 44 go as far as to clarify the military status of members of guerrilla forces. Combatant and prisoner of war status is granted to members of dissident forces when under the command of a central authority. Such combatants cannot conceal their allegiance; they must be recognizable as combatants while preparing for or during an attack. If we are to assume that IS forces follow the parameters of conduct then their captives also have to be given a certain degree of leeway. This is a very thin line when dealing with an extremist organization especially if its central authority is blurred.
What options does the ethic of modern warfare have to impose the civilized code of conduct on those who have not shown any remorse or regret in their sorties on men, women and children. The chilling executions of soldiers is not anything that augurs well for the negotiations. One can only hope the IS leadership recognizes that harming this pilot will only escalate the pressure on its forces while his return to Jordan could be seen as a gesture of good faith. In fact, there would be more to gain by letting him go than by making an example of the young lieutenant.
His father has rightly echoed the conventions when he said his son should not be seen as a hostage but as a guest of those who hold him in captivity.
Whether soldier or freedom fighter, terrorist or tyrant, in this part of the world a guest is ensured his safety once he seeks refuge and raises his hands in surrender. This historical imperative has to be so honored.
