THE ROLE OF CENTRAL PRISONER OF WAR: INFORMATION AGENCY FOR THE PROTECTION OF POW

5/19/2012 Department of Law, Northern University Shahara Nur Amin, ID #LLM 110360052 Course Name: International Humanitarian Law Course Code: LLM 6308 Submitted to: Md. Milan Hossain, Lecturer, Department of Law

Table of Contents
Prisoners of War...................................................................................................................................... 3 Ancient times .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Middle Ages and Renaissance .................................................................................................................. 3 Modern times.......................................................................................................................................... 4 Hague Convention of 1899...................................................................................................................... 6 Hague Convention of 1907...................................................................................................................... 7 First Geneva Convention ......................................................................................................................... 8 Second Geneva Convention ................................................................................................................... 11 Third Geneva Convention ...................................................................................................................... 11 Fourth Geneva Convention.................................................................................................................... 15 Release of prisoners .............................................................................................................................. 19 Treatment of POWs by the Axis............................................................................................................. 20 Treatment of POWs by the Allies........................................................................................................... 23 Transfers between the Allies ................................................................................................................. 24 Final Words..25

Page 2 of 25

Prisoner of war
A prisoner of war or "Missing-Captured" is a person, whether civilian or combatant, who is held in custody by an enemy power during or immediately after an armed conflict. The earliest recorded usage of the phrase is dated 1660.

Reasons for continuing custody

Captor states hold captured combatants and non-combatants in continuing custody for a range of legitimate and illegitimate reasons. They are held to isolate them from combatants still in the field, to release and repatriate them in an orderly manner after hostilities, to demonstrate military victory, to punish them, to prosecute them for war crimes, to exploit them for their labor, to recruit or even conscript them as their own combatants, to collect military and political intelligence from them, and to indoctrinate them in new political or religious beliefs.

History
Ancient times
For most of human history, depending on the culture of the victors, combatants on the losing side in a battle could expect to be either slaughtered or enslaved. The first Roman gladiators were prisoners of war and were named according to their ethnic roots such as Samnite, Thracian and the Gaul (Gallus). Homer's Illiad describes Greek and Trojan soldiers offering rewards of wealth to enemies who have defeated them on the battlefield in exchange for mercy, but this is not always accepted. Typically, little distinction was made between combatants and civilians, although women and children were more likely to be spared. Sometimes the purpose of a battle, if not a war, was to capture women, a practice known as raptio; the Rape of the Sabines was a large mass abduction by the founders of Rome. Typically women had no rights, and were held legally as chattel. In the fourth century AD, the Bishop Acacius of Amida, touched by the plight of Persian prisoners captured in a recent war with the Roman Empirewho were held in his town under appalling conditions and destined for a life of slavery, took the initiative of ransoming them, by selling his church's precious gold and silver vessels, and letting them return to their country. For this he was eventually canonizedwhich testifies to his act being exceptional. Likewise the distinction between POW and slave is not always clear. Some Native Americans captured Europeans and used them as both laborers and bargaining chips; see for example John R. Jewitt, an Englishman who wrote a memoir about his years as a captive of the Nootka people on the Pacific Northwest Coast from 18021805.

Middle Ages and Renaissance

During Childeric's siege and blockade of Paris in 464, the nun Genevive (later canonised as the city's Patron Saint) pleaded with the Frankish King for the welfare of prisoners of war and met with a favourable response. Later, Clovis I liberated captives after Genevieve urged him to do so. In the later Middle Ages, a number of religious wars aimed to not only defeat but eliminate their enemies. In Christian Europe, the extermination of the heretics or "non-believers" was considered Page 3 of 25

desirable. Examples include the 13th century Albigensian Crusade and the Northern Crusades. When asked by a Crusader how to distinguish between the Catholics and Cathars once they'd taken the city of Bziers, the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric famously replied, "Kill them all, God will know His own". Likewise the inhabitants of conquered cities were frequently massacred during the Crusades against the Muslims in the 11th and 12th centuries. Noblemen could hope to be ransomed; their families would have to send to their captors large sums of wealth commensurate with the social status of the captive. Many French prisoners of war were killed during the Battle of Agincourt in 1415. This was done in retaliation for the French killing of the boys and other noncombatants handling the baggage and equipment of the army, and because the French were attacking again and Henry was afraid that they would break through and free the prisoners to fight again. In feudal Japan there was no custom of ransoming prisoners of war, who were for the most part summarily executed. Every city or town that refused surrender and resisted the Mongols was subject to destruction. In Termez, on the Oxus: "all the people, both men and women, were driven out onto the plain, and divided in accordance with their usual custom, then they were all slain". The Aztecs were constantly at war with neighbouring tribes and groups. The goal of this constant warfare was to collect live prisoners for sacrifice. For the re-consecration of Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1487, the Aztecs reported that they sacrificed about 80,400 people over the course of four days. According to Ross Hassing, author of Aztec Warfare, "between 10,000 and 80,400 persons" were sacrificed in the ceremony. In the ancient Maya civilization of Mesoamerica more than a thousand years ago, prisoners of war Figure 1: Aztec sacrifices were paraded before the king and his royal court and subjected to ritual humiliation and torture. In pre-Islamic Arabia, upon capture, those captives not executed were made to beg for their subsistence. During the early reforms under Islam, Muhammad changed this custom and made it the responsibility of the Islamic government to provide food and clothing, on a reasonable basis, to captives, regardless of their religion. If the prisoners were in the custody of a person, then the responsibility was on the individual. He established the rule that prisoners of war must be guarded and not ill-treated, and that after the fighting was over, the prisoners were expected to be either released or ransomed. The freeing of prisoners in particular was highly recommended as a charitable act. Mecca was the first city to have the benevolent code applied. It is misunderstood that the leader of the Muslim force capturing non-Muslim prisoners could choose whether to kill prisoners, to ransom them, to enslave them, or to cut off their hands and feet on alternate sides because this law is applied not to the of wars but instead to people (either Muslims or non-Muslims) who do mischief in the land, gangsters, killers of the people for robbery or raping of women or children. However, Christians who were captured in the Crusades, combatants and noncombatants alike, were sold into slavery if they could not pay a ransom.

Modern times
Russian and Japanese prisoners being interrogated by Chinese officials during the Boxer Rebellion. The 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years' War, established the rule that prisoners of war should be released without ransom at the end of hostilities and that they should be allowed to return to their homelands. Page 4 of 25

There also evolved the right of parole, French for "discourse", in which a captured officer surrendered his sword and gave his word as a gentleman in exchange for privileges. If he swore not to escape, he could gain better accommodations and the freedom of the prison. If he swore to cease hostilities against the nation who held him captive, he could be repatriated or exchanged but could not serve against his former captors in a military capacity. About 56,000 soldiers died in prisons during the American Civil Waralmost 10% of all Civil War fatalities. During the 14 months the Camp Sumter, located near Andersonville, Georgia, existed, more than 45,000 Union soldiers were confined here. Of these, almost 13,000 (28%) died. At Camp Douglas in Chicago, Illinois, 10% of its Confederate prisoners died during one cold winter month; and Elmira Prison in New York State, with a death rate of 25%, very nearly equaled that of Andersonville.

Remedial measures
During the 19th century, there were increased efforts to improve the treatment and processing of prisoners. The extensive period of conflict during the American Revolutionary War (or American War of Independence) and Napoleonic Wars (17931815), followed by the Anglo-American War of 1812, led to the emergence of a cartel system for the exchange of prisoners, even while the belligerents were at war. A cartel was usually arranged by the respective armed service for the exchange of like-ranked personnel. The aim was to achieve a reduction in the number of prisoners held, while at the same time alleviating shortages of skilled personnel in the home country. Later, as a result of these emerging conventions a number of international conferences were held, starting with the Brussels Conference of 1874, with nations agreeing that it was necessary to prevent inhumane treatment of prisoners and the use of weapons causing unnecessary harm. Although no agreements were immediately ratified by the participating nations, work was continued that resulted in new conventions being adopted and becoming recognized as international law that specified that prisoners of war be treated humanely and diplomatically. Hague and Geneva Conventions Specifically, Chapter II of the Annex to the 1907 Hague Convention covered the treatment of prisoners of war in detail. These were further expanded in the Third Geneva Convention of 1929, and its revision of 1949.

Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907

The Hague Conventions were two international treaties negotiated at international peace conferences at The Hague in the Netherlands: The First Hague Conference in 1899 and the Second Hague Conference in 1907. Along with the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions were among the first formal statements of the laws of war and war crimes in the body of secular international law. A third conference was planned for 1914 and later rescheduled for 1915, but never took place due to the start of World War I. The German international law scholar and neo-Kantian pacifist Walther Schcking called the assemblies the "international union of Hague conferences". and saw them as a nucleus of an international federation that was to meet at regular intervals to administer justice and develop international law procedures for the peaceful settlement of disputes, asserting "that a definite political union of the states of the world has been created with the First and Second Conferences." The various Page 5 of 25

agencies created by the Conferences, like the Permanent Court of Arbitration, "are agents or organs of the union." A major effort in both the conferences was to create a binding international court for compulsory arbitration to settle international disputes, which was considered necessary to replace the institution of war. This effort, however, failed to realize success either in 1899 or in 1907. The First Conference was generally a success and was focused on disarmament efforts. The Second Conference failed to create a binding international court for compulsory arbitration but did enlarge the machinery for voluntary arbitration, and established conventions regulating the collection of debts, rules of war, and the rights and obligations of neutrals. Along with disarmament and obligatory arbitration, both conferences included negotiations concerning the laws of war and war crimes. Many of the rules laid down at the Hague Conventions were violated in the First World War. The German invasion of Belgium, for instance, was a violation of Hague III (1907), which states that hostilities must not commence without explicit warning. Most of the great powers, including the United States, Britain, Russia, France, China, and Persia, favored a binding international arbitration, but the condition was that the vote should be unanimous, and a few countries, led by Germany, vetoed the idea.

Hague Convention of 1899

The peace conference was proposed on August 29, 1898 by Russian Tsar Nicholas II. Nicholas and Count Mikhail Nikolayevich Muravyov, his foreign minister, were instrumental in initiating the conference. The conference opened on May 18, 1899, the Tsar's birthday. The convention was signed on July 29 of that year, and entered into force on September 4, 1900. The Hague Convention of 1899 consisted of four main sections and three additional declarations (the final main section is for some reason identical to the first additional declaration):

I: Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. This section included the creation of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. II: Laws and Customs of War on Land III: Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of Principles of Geneva Convention of 1864 IV: Prohibiting Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons Declaration I: On the Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons Declaration II: On the Use of Projectiles the Object of Which is the Diffusion of Asphyxiating or Deleterious Gases Declaration III: On the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body

The main effect of the Convention was to ban the use of certain types of modern technology in war: bombing from the air, chemical warfare, and hollow point bullets.

Page 6 of 25

Hague Convention of 1907

The second conference, in 1907, was generally a failure, with few major decisions. However, the meeting of major powers did prefigure later 20th-century attempts at international cooperation. The second conference was called at the suggestion of President Theodore Roosevelt in 1904, but postponed because of the war between Russia and Japan. The Second Peace Conference was held from June 15 to October 18, 1907, to expand upon the original Hague Convention, modifying some parts and adding others, with an increased focus on naval warfare. The British tried to secure limitation of armaments, but were defeated by the other powers, led by Germany, which feared a British attempt to stop the growth of the German fleet. Germany also rejected proposals for compulsory arbitration. However, the conference did enlarge the machinery for voluntary arbitration, and established conventions regulating the collection of debts, rules of war, and the rights and obligations of neutrals. The Final Agreement was signed on October 18, 1907, and entered into force on January 26, 1910. It consisted of thirteen sections, of which twelve were ratified and entered into force:

I: The Pacific Settlement of International Disputes II: The Limitation of Employment of Force for Recovery of Contract Debts III: The Opening of Hostilities IV: The Laws and Customs of War on Land
o

includes the Annex on The Qualifications of Belligerents, Chapter II: Prisoners of War

V: The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land VI: The Status of Enemy Merchant Ships at the Outbreak of Hostilities VII: The Conversion of Merchant Ships into War-Ships VIII: The Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines IX: Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War X: Adaptation to Maritime War of the Principles of the Geneva Convention XI: Certain Restrictions with Regard to the Exercise of the Right of Capture in Naval War XII: The Creation of an International Prize Court XIII: The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War

Two declarations were signed as well:

Declaration I: extending Declaration II from the 1899 Conference to other types of aircraft[6] Declaration II: on the obligatory arbitration

The Brazilian delegation was led by the statesman Ruy Barbosa, whose contribution was essential for the defense of the principle of legal equality of nations. The British delegation included the 11th Lord Reay (Donald James Mackay), Sir Ernest Satow and Eyre Crowe. The Russian delegation was led by Fyodor Martens. The Uruguayan delegation was led by Jos Batlle y Ordez, great defender of the Page 7 of 25

compulsory arbitration by creating the idea of an International Court of Arbitration, and an alliance of nations to force the arbitration. Geneva Protocol to Hague Convention Though not negotiated in The Hague, the Geneva Protocol to the Hague Convention is considered an addition to the Convention. Signed on June 17, 1925 and entering into force on February 8, 1928, it permanently bans the use of all forms of chemical and biological warfare in its single section, entitled Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. The protocol grew out of the increasing public outcry against chemical warfare following the use of mustard gas and similar agents in World War I, and fears that chemical and biological warfare could lead to horrific consequences in any future war. The protocol has since been augmented by the Biological Weapons Convention (1972) and the Chemical Weapons Convention (1993).

Geneva Conventions
The Geneva Conventions comprise four treaties, and three additional protocols, that establish the standards of international law for the humanitarian treatment of the victims of war. The singular term Geneva Convention denotes the agreements of 1949, negotiated in the aftermath of the Second World War (193945), which updated the terms of the first three treaties (1864, 1906, 1929), and added a fourth treaty. The articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) extensively defined the basic rights of prisoners (civil and military) during war; established protections for the wounded; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war zone. The treaties of 1949 were ratified, in whole or with reservations, by 194 countries. The Geneva Convention also defines the rights and protections of non-combatants. Because the Geneva Conventions are about people in war, the articles do not address warfare proper the use of weapons of warwhich is the subject of the Hague Conventions (First Hague Conference, 1899; Second Hague Conference 1907), and the biochemical warfare Geneva Protocol (Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, 1929).

First Geneva Convention

The First Geneva Convention, for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in the Field, is one of four treaties of the Geneva Conventions. It defines "the basis on which rest the rules of international law for the protection of the victims of armed conflicts." It was first adopted in 1864, but was significantly updated in 1906, 1929, and 1949. It is inextricably linked to the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is both the instigator for the inception and enforcer of the articles in these conventions. History The First Geneva Convention was instituted at a critical period in European political and military history. Between the fall of the first Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815 and the rise of his nephew in the Italian campaign of 1859, the powers had maintained peace in Western Europe. Yet, with the conflict in the Crimea, war had returned to Europe, and while those troubles were "in a distant Page 8 of 25

and inaccessible region" northern Italy was "so accessible from all parts of western Europe that it instantly filled with curious observers;" while the bloodshed was not excessive the sight of it was unfamiliar and shocking. Despite its intent of ameliorating the ravages of war the inception of the First Geneva Convention inaugurated "a renewal of military activity on a large scale, to which the people of western Europe had not been accustomed since the first Napoleon had been eliminated." The movement for an international set of laws governing the treatment and care for the wounded and prisoners of war began when relief activist Henri Dunant witnessed the Battle of Solferino in 1859, fought between French-Piedmontese and Austrian armies in Northern Italy. The subsequent suffering of 40,000 wounded soldiers left on the field due to lack of facilities, personnel, and truces to give them medical aid moved Dunant to action. Upon return to Geneva, Dunant published his account Un Souvenir de Solferino and, through his membership in the Geneva Society for Public Welfare, he urged the calling together of an international conference and soon helped found the International Committee of the Red Cross in 1863. The International Committee of the Red Cross, while recognizing that it is "primarily the duty and responsibility of a nation to safeguard the health and physical well-being of its own people," knew there would always, especially in times of war, be a "need for voluntary agencies to supplement the official agencies charged with these responsibilities in every country." To ensure that its mission was widely accepted, it required a body of rules to govern its own activities and those of the involved belligerent parties. On August 22, 1864 several European states congregated in Geneva, Switzerland and signed the First Geneva Convention:

Figure 2: The signing of the First Geneva Convention

1. Grand Duchy of Baden (now Germany) 2. Kingdom of Belgium 3. Kingdom of Denmark 4. French Empire 5. Grand Duchy of Hesse (now Germany) 6. Kingdom of Italy Page 9 of 25

7. Kingdom of the Netherlands 8. Kingdom of Portugal 9. Kingdom of Prussia (now Germany) 10. Kingdom of Spain 11. Swiss Confederation 12. Kingdom of Wrttemberg (now Germany) Norway and Sweden signed in December. Not only was it the first, it was also the most basic and "derived its obligatory force from the implied consent of the states which accepted and applied them in the conduct of their military operations." This first effort provided only for: 1. the immunity from capture and destruction of all establishments for the treatment of wounded and sick soldiers, 2. the impartial reception and treatment of all combatants, 3. the protection of civilians providing aid to the wounded, and 4. the recognition of the Red Cross symbol as a means of identifying persons and equipment covered by the agreement. Despite its basic mandates it was successful in effecting significant and rapid reforms. Due to significant ambiguities in the articles with certain terms and concepts and even more so to the rapidly developing nature of war and military technology the original articles had to be revised and expanded, largely at the Second Geneva Convention in 1906 and Hague Convention of 1899 which extended the articles to maritime warfare. It was updated again in 1929 when minor modifications were made to it. However, as Jean S. Pictet, Director of the International Committee of the Red Cross, noted in 1951, "the law, however, always lags behind charity; it is tardy in conforming with lifes realities and the needs of humankind," as such it is the duty of the Red Cross "to assist in the widening the scope of law, on the assumption that law will retain its value," principally through the revision and expansion of these basic principles of the original Geneva Convention. Summary of provisions The original ten articles of the 1864 treaty have been expanded to the current 64 articles. This lengthy treaty protects soldiers that are hors de combat (out of the battle due to sickness or injury), as well as medical and religious personnel, and civilians in the zone of battle. Among its principal provisions:

Article 12 mandates that wounded and sick soldiers who are out of the battle should be humanely treated, and in particular should not be killed, injured, tortured, or subjected to biological experimentation. This article is the keystone of the treaty, and defines the principles from which most of the rest the treaty is derived, including the obligation to respect medical units and establishments (Chapter III), the personnel entrusted with the care of the wounded (Chapter IV), buildings and material (Chapter V), medical transports (Chapter VI), and the protective sign (Chapter VII). Page 10 of 25

Article 15 mandates that wounded and sick soldiers should be collected, cared for, and protected, though they may also become prisoners of war. Article 16 mandates that parties to the conflict should record the identity of the dead and wounded, and transmit this information to the opposing party. Article 9 allows the International Red Cross "or any other impartial humanitarian organization" to provide protection and relief of wounded and sick soldiers, as well as medical and religious personnel.

For a detailed discussion of each article of the treaty, see the original text and the commentary. There are currently 194 countries parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including this first treaty but also including the other three.

Second Geneva Convention

The Second Geneva Convention, for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, is one of the four treaties of the Geneva Conventions. It was first adopted in 1906, after the Russo-Japanese war, but was significantly updated in 1929 and again in 1949. It adapts the main protections of the First Geneva Convention to combat at sea. Summary of Provisions The treaty is a lengthy document consisting of 63 articles. The most essential provisions of the treaty are:

Articles 12 and 18 requires all parties to protect and care for the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked. Article 21 allows appeals to be made to neutral vessels to help collect and care for the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked. The neutral vessels cannot be captured. Articles 36 and 37 protect religious and medical personnel serving on a combat ship. Article 22 states that hospital ships cannot be used for any military purpose, and owing to their humanitarian mission, they cannot be attacked or captured. Article 14 clarifies that although a warship cannot capture a hospital ship's medical staff, it can hold the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked as prisoners of war.

For a detailed discussion of each article of the treaty, see the original text and the commentary. There are currently 194 countries parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including this second treaty but also including the other three.

Third Geneva Convention

The Third Geneva Convention, relative to the treatment of prisoners of war, is one of the four treaties of the Geneva Conventions. It was first adopted in 1929, but was significantly updated in 1949. It defines humanitarian protections for prisoners of war.

Page 11 of 25

Part I: General provisions This part sets out the overall parameters for GCIII:

Articles 1 and 2 cover which parties are bound by GCIII Article 2 specifies when the parties are bound by GCIII
o

That any armed conflict between two or more "High Contracting Parties" is covered by GCIII; That it applies to occupations of a "High Contracting Party"; That the relationship between the "High Contracting Parties" and a non-signatory, the party will remain bound until the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention. "...Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof."

o o

Article 3 has been called a "Convention in miniature." It is the only article of the Geneva Conventions that applies in non-international conflicts. It describes minimal protections which must be adhered to by all individuals within a signatory's territory during an armed conflict not of an international character (regardless of citizenship or lack thereof): Noncombatants, combatants who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, including prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. The passing of sentences must also be pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. Article 3's protections exist even if one is not classified as a prisoner of war. Article 3 also states that parties to the internal conflict should Endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of GCIII. Article 4 defines prisoners of war to include:
o

4.1.1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces 4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:

that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I); that of carrying arms openly; that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

Page 12 of 25

4.1.3 Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. 4.1.4 Civilians who have non-combat support roles with the military and who carry a valid identity card issued by the military they support. 4.1.5 Merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favorable treatment under any other provisions of international law. 4.1.6 Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. 4.3 makes explicit that Article 33 takes precedence for the treatment of medical personnel of the enemy and chaplains of the enemy.

Article 5 specifies that prisoners of war (as defined in article 4) are protected from the time of their capture until their final repatriation. It also specifies that when there is any doubt whether a combatant belongs to the categories in article 4, they should be treated as such until their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.

Part II: General Protection of Prisoners of War This part of the convention covers the status of prisoners of war. Article 12 states that prisoners of war are the responsibility of the state, not the persons who capture them, and that they may not be transferred to a state that is not party to the Convention. Articles 13 to 16 state that prisoners of war must be treated humanely without any adverse discrimination and that their medical needs must be met. Part III: Captivity This part is divided into several sections: Section 1 covers the beginning of captivity (Articles 1720). It dictates what information a prisoner must give and interrogation methods that the detaining power may use "No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion". It dictates what private property a prisoner of war may keep and that the prisoner of war must be evacuated from the combat zone as soon as possible. Section 2 covers the internment of prisoners of war and is broken down into 8 chapters which cover: 1. General observations (Articles 2124) 2. Quarters, food and clothing (Articles 2528) 3. Hygiene and medical attention (Articles 2932) 4. The treatment of enemy medical personnel and chaplains retained to assist prisoners of war (Article 33) 5. Religious, intellectual and physical activities (Articles 3438) Page 13 of 25

6. Discipline (Articles 3942) 7. Military rank (Articles 4345) 8. Transfer of prisoners of war after their arrival in a camp (Articles 4648) Section 3 (Articles 4957) covers the type of labour that a prisoner of war may be compelled to do, taking such factors as rank, age, and sex into consideration, and that which because it is unhealthy or dangerous can only be done by prisoners of war who volunteer for such work. It goes into details about such things as the accommodation, medical facilities, and that even if the prisoner of war works for a private person the military authority remains responsible for them. Rates of pay for work done are covered by Article 62 in the next section. Section 4 (Articles 5868) covers the financial resources of prisoners of war. Section 5 (Articles 6974) covers the relations of prisoners of war with the exterior. This covers the frequency of which a prisoner of war can send and receive post, including parcels. The Detaining power has the right to censor all mail, but must do so as quickly as possible. Section 6 covers the relations between prisoners of war and the detaining authorities: it is broken down into three chapters. 1. Complaints of prisoners of war respecting the conditions of captivity(Article 78) 2. Prisoner of war representatives (Articles 7981). Where there is no senior officer available in a camp the section stipulates that "prisoners shall freely elect by secret ballot, [a representative] every six months". The representative, whether the senior officer or an elected person, acts as a conduit between the authorities of the detaining power and the prisoners. 3. The sub-section on "Penal and disciplinary sanctions" is subdivided into three parts: 1. General provisions (Articles 8288) 2. Disciplinary sanctions (Articles 8998) 3. Juridical proceedings (Articles 99108) Part IV: Termination of Captivity This part is divided into several sections: Section 1 (Articles 109117) covers the direct repatriation and accommodation in neutral countries. Section 2 (Articles 118119) covers the release and repatriation of prisoners of war at the close of hostilities. Section 3 (Articles 120121) covers the death of a prisoner of war. Part V: Information Bureau and Relief Societies for Prisoners of War The Information Bureau is an organization that must be set up by the Detaining Power to facilitate the sharing of information by the parties to conflict and neutral powers as required by the various provisions of the Third Geneva Convention. It will correspond freely with "A Central Prisoners of War

Page 14 of 25

Information Agency ... created in a neutral country" to act as a conduit with the Power to which the prisoners of war owe their allegiance. The provisions of this part are contained in Articles 122 to 125. The central prisoners of war information agency was created within the Red Cross. Part VI: Execution of the Convention Consists of two sections: Section 1 (Articles 126132) General provision Section 2 (Articles 133143) Final provisions. Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention protects captured military personnel, some guerrilla fighters and certain civilians. It applies from the moment a prisoner is captured until he or she is released or repatriated. One of the main provisions of the convention makes it illegal to torture prisoners and states that a prisoner can only be required to give their name, date of birth, rank and service number (if applicable). However, nations vary in their dedication to following these laws, and historically the treatment of POWs has varied greatly. During the 20th century, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany (towards Russian POW) were notorious for atrocities against prisoners during World War II. The German military used the Soviet Union's refusal to sign the Geneva Convention as a reason for not providing the necessities of life to Russian POWs; and the Soviets similarly killed Axis prisoners or used them as slave labor. North Korean and North and South Vietnamese forces routinely killed or mistreated prisoners taken during those conflicts.

Fourth Geneva Convention

The Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, commonly referred to as the Fourth Geneva Convention and abbreviated as GCIV, is one of the four treaties of the Geneva Conventions. It was adopted in August 1949, and defines humanitarian protections for civilians in a war zone, and outlaws the practice of total war. There are currently 194 countries party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including this fourth treaty but also including the other three.[1] In 1993, the United Nations Security Council adopted a report from the Secretary-General and a Commission of Experts which concluded that the Geneva Conventions had passed into the body of customary international law, thus making them binding on non-signatories to the Conventions whenever they engage in armed conflicts. Part I. General Provisions This sets out the overall parameters for GCIV: Article 2 states that signatories are bound by the convention both in war, armed conflicts where war has not been declared and in an occupation of another country's territory. Article 3 states that even where there is not a conflict of international character the parties must as a minimum adhere to minimal protections described as: noncombatants, members of armed forces who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions: Page 15 of 25

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. Article 4 defines who is a protected person: Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals. But it explicitly excludes Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention and the citizens of a neutral state or an allied state if that state has normal diplomatic relations within the State in whose hands they are. A number of articles specify how Protecting Powers, ICRC and other humanitarian organizations may aid Protected persons. Protected person is the most important definition in this section because many of the articles in the rest of GCIV only apply to Protected persons. Part II. General Protection of Populations against Certain Consequences of War Article 13. The provisions of Part II cover the whole of the populations of the countries in conflict, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, nationality, religion or political opinion, and are intended to alleviate the sufferings caused by war. Part III. Status and Treatment of Protected Persons Section I. Provisions common to the territories of the parties to the conflict and to occupied territories Article 32. A protected person/s shall not have anything done to them of such a character as to cause physical suffering or extermination ... the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment' While popular debate remains on what constitutes a legal definition of torture, the ban on corporal punishment simplifies the matter; even the most mundane physical abuse is thereby forbidden by Article 32, as a precaution against alternate definitions of torture. The prohibition on scientific experiments was added, in part, in response to experiments by German and Japanese doctors during World War II, of whom Josef Mengele was the most infamous.

Collective punishments Article 33. No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

Page 16 of 25

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions collective punishments are a war crime. By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and World War II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity. In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. Additional concern also addressed the United States' atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which, in turn, caused death and disease to millions of Japanese civilians as well as their decedents. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidator measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice." Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted. Section III. Occupied territories Articles 47-78 impose substantial obligations on occupying powers. As well as numerous provisions for the general welfare of the inhabitants of an occupied territory, an occupier may not forcibly deport protected persons, or deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory (Art.49). Article 49 - Population transfer Article 50 - Care and education of children Article 53 - Destruction of property Article 56 - Medical services Part IV. Execution of the Convention This part contains "the formal or diplomatic provisions which it is customary to place at the end of an international Convention to settle the procedure for bringing it into effect are grouped together under this heading (1). They are similar in all four Geneva Conventions.

Qualifications
To be entitled to prisoner-of-war status, captured service members must be lawful combatants entitled to combatant's privilegewhich gives them immunity from punishment for crimes constituting lawful acts of war such as killing enemy troops. To qualify under the Third Geneva Convention, a combatant must have conducted military operations according to the laws and customs of war, be part of a chain of command, wear a "fixed distinctive marking, visible from a distance" and bear arms openly. (The Convention recognizes a few other groups as well, such as persons "who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units".)

Page 17 of 25

Thus, uniforms and/or badges are important in determining prisoner-of-war status; and francs-tireurs, terrorists, saboteurs, mercenaries and spies do not qualify. In practice, these criteria are rarely interpreted strictly. Guerrillas, for example, usually do not wear a uniform or carry arms openly, but captured guerrillas are often granted POW status. The criteria are applied primarily to international armed conflicts; in civil wars, insurgents are often treated as traitors or criminals by government forces, and are sometimes executed. However, in the American Civil War, both sides treated captured troops as POWs, presumably out of reciprocity, although the Union regarded Confederate personnel as separatist rebels. However, guerrillas and other irregular combatants generally cannot expect to receive benefits from both civilian and military status simultaneously. The United States Military Terminology and Code of Conduct The United States Military Code of Conduct was promulgated in 1955 via Executive Order 10631 under President Dwight D. Eisenhower to serve as a moral code for United States service members who have been taken prisoner. It was created primarily in response to the breakdown of leadership and organization, specifically when US forces were POWs during the Korean War. When a military member is taken prisoner, the Code of Conduct reminds them that the chain of command is still in effect (the highest ranking service member eligible for command, regardless of service branch, is in command), and requires them to support their leadership. The Code of Conduct also requires service members to resist giving information to the enemy (beyond identifying themselves), receiving special favors or parole, or otherwise providing their enemy captors aid and comfort. Since the Vietnam War, the official US military term for enemy POWs is EPW (Enemy Prisoner of War). This name change was introduced in order to distinguish between enemy and US captives. In 2000 the U.S. Military replaced the designation "Prisoner of War" with "Missing-Captured". A January 2008 directive states that the reasoning behind this is since "Prisoner of War" is the international legal recognized status for such people there is no need for any individual country to follow suit. This change remains relatively unknown even among experts in the field and "Prisoner of War" remaines widely used in the Pentagon which has a "POW/Missing Personnel Office" and awards "Prisoner of War" Medals.

World War I
During World War I, about 8 million men surrendered and were held in POW camps until the war ended. All nations pledged to follow the Hague rules on fair treatment of prisoners of war, and in general the POWs had a much higher survival rate than their peers who were not captured. Individual surrenders were uncommon; usually a large unit surrendered all its men. At Tannenberg 92,000 Russians surrendered during the battle. When the besieged garrison of Kaunas surrendered in 1915, 20,000 Russians became prisoners. Over half the Russian losses were prisoners as a proportion of those captured, wounded or killed. About 3.3 million men became prisoners. The German Empire held 2.5 million prisoners; Russia held 2.9 million, and Britain and France held about 720,000, mostly gained in the period just before the Armistice in 1918. The US held 48,000. The Page 18 of 25

most dangerous moment was the act of surrender, when helpless soldiers were sometimes shot down. Once prisoners reached a POW camp conditions were better (and often much better than in World War II), thanks in part to the efforts of the International Red Cross and inspections by neutral nations. There was however much harsh treatment of POWs in Germany, as recorded by the American ambassador to Germany (prior to America's entry into the war), James W. Gerard, who published his findings in "My Four Years in Germany". Even worse conditions are reported in the book "Escape of a Princess Pat" by the Canadian George Pearson. It was particularly bad in Russia, where starvation was common for prisoners and civilians alike; roughly 25% of its 2 to 2.4 million POWs died in captivity. Nearly 375,000 of the 500,000 Austro-Hungarian prisoners of war taken by Russians perished in Siberia from smallpox and typhus. In Germany food was short but only 5% died. The Ottoman Empire often treated prisoners of war poorly. Some 11,800 British soldiers, most of them Indians, became prisoners after the five-month Siege of Kut, in Mesopotamia, in April 1916. Many were weak and starved when they surrendered and 4,250 died in captivity. During the Sinai and Palestine campaign 217 Australian and unknown numbers of British, New Zealand and Indian soldiers were captured by Ottoman Empire forces. About 50% of the Australian prisoners were light horsemen including 48 missing believed captured on 1 May 1918 in the Jordan Valley. Australian Flying Corps pilots and observers were captured in the Sinai Peninsula, Palestine and the Levant. One third of all Australian prisoners were captured on Gallipoli including the crew of the submarine AE2 which made a passage through the Dardanelles in 1915. Forced marches and crowded railway journeys preceded years in camps where disease, poor diet and inadequate medical facilities prevailed. About 25 % of other ranks died, many from malnutrition, while only one officer died. The most curious case came in Russia where the Czechoslovak Legion of Czechoslovak prisoners (from the Austro-Hungarian army): they were released in 1917, armed themselves, briefly culminating into a military and diplomatic force during the Russian Civil War.

Release of prisoners
At the end of the war in 1918 there were believed to be 140,000 British prisoners of war in Germany, including 3,000 internees held in neutral Switzerland. The first British prisoners were released and reached Calais on 15 November. Plans were made for them to be sent via Dunkirk to Dover and a large reception camp was established at Dover capable of housing 40,000 men, which could later be used for demobilization. On 13 December 1918 the armistice was extended and the Allies reported that by 9 December 264,000 prisoners had been repatriated. A very large number of these had been released en masse and sent across Allied lines without any food or shelter. This created difficulties for the receiving Allies and many released prisoners died from exhaustion. The released POWs were met by cavalry troops and sent back through the lines in lorries to reception centres where they were refitted with boots and clothing and dispatched to the ports in trains. Upon arrival at the receiving camp the POWs were registered and "boarded" before being dispatched to their own homes. All commissioned officers had to write a report on the circumstances of their capture and to ensure that they had done all they could to avoid capture. Each returning officer and man was given a message from King George V, written in his own hand and reproduced on a lithograph. It read as follows: "The Queen joins me in welcoming you on your release from the miseries & hardships, which you have endured with so much patience and courage.

Page 19 of 25

During these many months of trial, the early rescue of our gallant Officers & Men from the cruelties of their captivity has been uppermost in our thoughts. We are thankful that this longed for day has arrived, & that back in the old Country you will be able once more to enjoy the happiness of a home & to see good days among those who anxiously look for your return. While the Allied prisoners were sent home at the end of the war, the same treatment was not granted to Central Powers prisoners of the Allies and Russia, many of which had to serve as forced labour, e.g. in France, until 1920. They were released after many approaches by the ICRC to the Allied Supreme Council.

World War II
Niall Ferguson tabulated the total death rate for POWs in World War II as follows: Percentage of POWs that Died Russian POWs held by Germans German POWs held by Russians American POWs held by Japanese British POWs held by Japanese British POWs held by Germans German POWs held by French German POWs held by Americans German POWs held by British 57.5% 35.8% 33.0% 24.8% 3.5% 2.58% 0.15% 0.03%

German POWs held by Eastern Europeans 32.9%

Treatment of POWs by the Axis

Empire of Japan The Empire of Japan, which had signed but never ratified the Second Geneva Convention of 1929, also did not treat prisoners of war in accordance with international agreements, including provisions of the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907), either during the Second Sino-Japanese War or during the Pacific War because the Japanese viewed surrender as dishonorable. Moreover, according to a directive ratified on 5 August 1937 by Hirohito, the constraints of the Hague Conventions were explicitly removed on Chinese prisoners. Prisoners of war from China, the United States, Australia, Britain, Canada, India, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the Philippines held by the Japanese armed forces were subject to murder, beatings, summary punishment, brutal treatment, forced labour, medical experimentation, starvation rations and poor medical treatment. The most notorious use of forced labour was in the construction of the BurmaThailand Death Railway.

Page 20 of 25

According to the findings of the Tokyo Tribunal, the death rate of Western prisoners was 27.1%, seven times that of POWs under the Germans and Italians. The death rate of Chinese was much larger. Thus, while 37,583 prisoners from the United Kingdom, Commonwealth and Dominions, 28,500 from the Netherlands and 14,473 from the United States were released after the surrender of Japan, the number for the Chinese was only 56. After the war, it became clear that there existed a high command order issued from the War Ministry in Tokyo to kill all remaining POWs. No direct access to the POWs was provided to the International Red Cross. Escapes among Caucasian prisoners were almost impossible because of the difficulty of men of Caucasian descent hiding in Asiatic societies. Allied POW camps and ship-transports were sometimes accidental targets of Allied attacks. The number of deaths which occurred when Japanese "hell ships"unmarked transport ships in which POWs were transported in harsh conditionswere attacked by US Navy submarines was particularly high. Gavan Daws has calculated that "of all POWs who died in the Pacific War, one in three was killed on the water by friendly fire". Daves states that 10,800 of the 50,000 POWs shipped by the Japanese were killed at sea while Donald L. Miller states that "approximately 21,000 Allied POWs died at sea, about 19,000 of them killed by friendly fire." Life in the POW camps was recorded at great risk to themselves by artists such as Jack Bridger Chalker, Philip Meninsky, Ashley George Old and Ronald Searle. Human hair was often used for brushes, plant juices and blood for paint, and toilet paper as the "canvas". Some of their works were used as evidence in the trials of Japanese war criminals. Germany Western Allied POWs Germany and Italy generally treated prisoners from the British Commonwealth, France, the USA and other western Allies in accordance with the Geneva Convention (1929), which had been signed by these countries. Consequently, western Allied officers were not usually made to work and personnel of lower rank were usually compensated, or not required to work either. The main complaints of western Allied prisoners of war in German Army POW campsespecially during the last two years of the war concerned shortages of food, although this fate was shared by German personnel and civilians, due to blockade conditions. Only a small proportion of western Allied POWs who were Jews or whom the Nazis believed to be Jewishwere killed as part of the Holocaust or were subjected to other antisemitic policies. For example, Major Yitzhak Ben-Aharon, a Palestinian Jew who had enlisted in the British Army, and who was captured by the Germans in Greece in 1941, experienced four years of captivity under entirely normal conditions for POWs. However, a small number of Allied personnel were sent to concentration camps, for a variety of reasons including being Jewish. As the US historian Joseph Robert White put it: "An important exception ... is the sub-camp for U.S. POWs at Berga an der Elster, officially called Arbeitskommando 625. Berga was the deadliest work detachment for American captives in Germany. 73 men who participated, or 21 percent of the detachment, perished in two months. 80 of the 350 POWs were Jews. Another well-known example was a group of 168 Australian, British, Canadian, New Zealand and US aviators who were held for two months at Buchenwald concentration camp; two of the POWs died at Buchenwald. Two possible reasons have been suggested for this incident: German authorities wanted to make an example of Terrorflieger (terrorist aviators) and/or these aircrews were classified as spies, because they had been disguised as civilians when they were apprehended. As Soviet ground forces approached some POW camps in early 1945, German guards forced western Allied POWs to walk long distances towards central Germany, often in extreme winter weather conditions. It is estimated that, out of 257,000 POWs, about 80,000 were subject to such marches and up to 3,500 of them died as a result. Page 21 of 25

Eastern European POWs Germany did not apply the same standard of treatment to non-western prisoners, especially many Polish and Soviet POWs who suffered harsh conditions and died in large numbers while in captivity. Between 1941 and 1945, the Axis powers took about 5.7 million Soviet prisoners. About one million of them were released during the war, in that their status changed but they remained under German authority. A little over 500,000 either escaped or were liberated by the Red Army. Some 930,000 more were found alive in camps after the war. The remaining 3.3 million prisoners (57.5% of the total captured) died during their captivity. Between the launching of Operation Barbarossa in the summer of 1941 and the following spring, 2.8 million of the 3.2 million Soviet prisoners taken died while in German hands. According to Russian military historian General Grigoriy Krivosheyev, 4.6 million Soviet prisoners were taken by the Axis powers, of which 1.8 million were found alive in camps after the war and 318,770 were released by the Axis during the war and were then drafted into the Soviet armed forces again. By comparison, 8,348 Western Allied prisoners died in German camps during 193945 (3.5% of the 232,000 total). An official justification used by the Germans for this policy was that the Soviet Union had not signed the Geneva Convention. This was not legally justifiable, however, as under article 82 of the Geneva Convention (1929), signatory countries had to give POWs of all signatory and non-signatory countries the rights assigned by the convention. Beevor indicates that about one month after the German invasion in 1941 an offer was made by the USSR for a reciprocal adherence to the Hague conventions. This 'note' was left unanswered by Third Reich officials. In contrast, Tolstoy discusses that the German Government as well as the International Red Cross made several efforts to regulate reciprocal treatment of prisoners until early 1942, but received no answers from the Soviet side. Further, the Soviets took a harsh position towards captured Soviet soldiers as they expected each soldier to fight to the death and automatically excluded any prisoner from the "Russian community". Some Soviet POWs and forced laborers transported to Nazi Germany were, on their return to the USSR, treated as traitors and sent to gulag prison camps. The remainder was barred from all but the most menial jobs. Treatment of POWs by the Soviet Union According to some sources, the Soviets captured 3.5 million Axis servicemen (excluding Japanese) of which more than a million died. One specific example of the tragic fate of the German POWs was after the Battle of Stalingrad, during which the Soviets captured 91,000 German troops, many already starved and ill, of whom only 5,000 survived the war. German soldiers were for many years after the war kept as forced labour. The last German POWs (those who were sentenced for war crimes, many times without sufficient reasons) were released by the Soviets in 1955, only after Joseph Stalin had died. At least 54,000 Italian POWs died in Russia, with a mortality rate of 84.5%. The Poles As a result of the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, hundreds of thousands of Polish soldiers became prisoners of war in the Soviet Union. Thousands of them were executed; over 20,000 Polish military personnel and civilians perished in the Katyn massacre. Out of Anders' 80,000 evacuees from Soviet Union gathered in the United Kingdom only 310 volunteered to return to Poland in 1947. Out of the 230,000 Polish prisoners of war taken by the Soviet army, only 82,000 survived. Japanese With the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 Japanese soldiers became prisoners in the Soviet Union, where they, just as other Axis POWs, had to remain as labour for several years. The Americans As the Soviet Union entered into German territory during the later stages of the war, Soviet troops in some cases overran German camps containing US POWs. Allegations have been made that some of these POWs were never repatriated, instead they were allegedly sent to the USSR to be used as bargaining chips. Page 22 of 25

Treatment of POWs by the Allies

Germans During the war the armies of Allied nations such as the US, UK, Canada and Australia were ordered to treat Axis prisoners strictly in accordance with the Geneva Convention (1929). Some breaches of the Convention took place, however. According to Stephen E. Ambrose, of the roughly 1,000 US combat veterans that he had interviewed, roughly one-third told him they had seen US troops kill German prisoners. Towards the end of the war in Europe, as large numbers of Axis soldiers surrendered, the US created the designation of Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEF) so as not to treat prisoners as POWs. A lot of these soldiers were kept in open fields in various Rheinwiesenlagers. Controversy has arisen about how Eisenhower managed these prisoners. After the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the POW status of the German prisoners was in many cases maintained, and they were for several years used as forced labour in countries such as the UK and France. Many died when forced to clear minefields in Norway, France etc.; "by September 1945 it was estimated by the French authorities that two thousand prisoners were being maimed and killed each month in accidents" In 1946 the UK had more than 400,000 German prisoners, many had been transferred from POW camps in the US and Canada. Many of these were for over three years after the German surrender used as forced labour, as a form of "reparations". "The POWs referred to themselves as 'slave labour', with some justice." Their emotional state was worsened "from the anxiety and hope of the first half of 1946 to the depression and nihilism of 1948." A public debate ensued in the UK, where words such as "forced labour", "slaves", "slave labour" were increasingly used in the media and in the House of Commons. In 1947 the Ministry of agriculture argued against rapid repatriation of working German prisoners, since by then they made up 25 percent of the land workforce, and they wanted to use them also in 1948. The "London Cage", an MI19 prisoner of war facility in the UK used for interrogating prisoners before they were sent to prison camps during and immediately after World War II, was subject to allegations of torture. After the German surrender, the International Red Cross was prohibited from providing aid such as food or visiting prisoner camps in Germany. However, after making approaches to the Allies in the autumn of 1945 it was allowed to investigate the camps in the British and French occupation zones of Germany, as well as to provide relief to the prisoners held there. On February 4, 1946, the Red Cross was permitted to visit and assist prisoners also in the US occupation zone of Germany, although only with very small quantities of food. "During their visits, the delegates observed that German prisoners of war were often detained in appalling conditions. They drew the attention of the authorities to this fact, and gradually succeeded in getting some improvements made". The Allies also shipped POWs between them, with for example 6,000 German officers transferred from Western Allied camps to the Sachsenhausen concentration camp that now was under Soviet Union administration. The US also shipped 740,000 German POWs as forced labourers to France from where newspaper reports told of very bad treatment. Judge Robert H. Jackson, Chief US prosecutor in the Nuremberg trials, in October 1945 told US President Harry S. Truman that the Allies themselves: "Have done or are doing some of the very things we are prosecuting the Germans for. The French are so violating the Geneva Convention in the treatment of prisoners of war that our command is taking back prisoners sent to them. We are prosecuting plunder and our Allies are practicing it." Hungarians Hungarians became POWs of the Western Allies, some of these were just as the Germans used as forced labour in France after the cessation of hostilities.

Page 23 of 25

Japanese Although thousands of Japanese were taken prisoner, most fought until they were killed or committed suicide. Of the 22,000 Japanese soldiers present at the beginning of the Battle of Iwo Jima, over 20,000 were killed and only 216 were taken prisoner. Of the 30,000 Japanese troops that defended Saipan, less than 1,000 remained alive at battle's end. Japanese prisoners sent to camps fared well; however, some Japanese were killed when trying to surrender or were massacred just after they had surrendered. Some Japanese prisoners in POW camps died at their own hands, either directly or by attacking guards with the intention of forcing the guards to kill them. In some instances, Japanese prisoners were tortured by a variety of methods. A method of torture used by the Chinese National Revolutionary Army (NRA) included suspending the prisoner by the neck in a wooden cage until they died. In very rare cases, some were beheaded by sword, and a severed head was once used as a soccer ball by Chinese National Revolutionary Army (NRA) soldiers. After the war many Japanese were kept on as Japanese Surrendered Personnel until mid-1947 and used as forced labour doing menial tasks, while 35,000 were kept on in arms within their wartime military organisation and under their own officers and used in combat alongside British troops seeking to suppress the independence movements in the Dutch East Indies and French Indochina. Italians In 1943 Italy overthrew the Dictator Mussolini, and became a co-belligerent with the Allies. This did not mean any change in status for Italian POWs however, since due to the labour shortages in the UK and the USA they were retained as POWs there. In September 1943, Italian officers were arrested and taken to German internment camps in East Europe, where they were held for the duration of WW2. The International Red Cross could do nothing for them, as they were not regarded as POW's, but the prisoners held the status of "Military Internees". Treatment of the prisoners was generally poor. The author Giovanni Guareschi was among those interned and wrote about this time in his life. The book was translated and published as "My Secret Diary". He wrote about the hungers of semi-starvation, the casual murder of individual prisoners by guards and how when they were released (now in a German camp) they found a deserted German town, filled with foodstuffs that they (with other released prisoners) ate. Cossacks On 11 February 1945, at the conclusion of the Yalta Conference, the United States and the United Kingdom signed a Repatriation Agreement with the USSR. The interpretation of this Agreement resulted in the forcible repatriation of all Russians (Operation Keelhaul) regardless of their wishes. The forced repatriation operations took place in 1945-1947.

Transfers between the Allies

The United States handed over 740,000 German prisoners to France, a signatory of the Geneva Convention. The Soviet Union had not signed the Geneva Convention. According to Edward Peterson the U.S. chose to hand over several hundred thousand German prisoners to the Soviet Union in May 1945 as a "gesture of friendship". U.S. forces also refused to accept the surrender of German troops attempting to surrender to them in Saxony and Bohemia, and handed them over to the Soviet Union instead. It is also known that 6000 German officers were sent from camps in the West to the Soviets, who put them in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp which at the time was one of the NKVD special camp and from which it is known that there were transfers further east to Siberia.

Page 24 of 25

Final Words
This is the final list of nations with the highest number of POWs since the start of World War II, listed in descending order. These are also the highest numbers in any war since the Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War entered into force on 19 June 1931. Till date, The USSR had not signed the Geneva Convention. Armies Soviet Union Number of POWs held in captivity 45.7 million taken by Germany (2.73.3 million died in German POW camps) 3,127,380 taken by USSR (474,967 died in captivity) (according to an other source 1,094,250 died in captivity (35.8 %) Unknown number in Yugoslavia, Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark (the death rate for German prisoners of war was highest in Yugoslavia with over 50%) 1.3 million unknown

Name of conflict World War II (Total)

Nazi Germany

World War II

France Poland United Kingdom United States Pakistan Iraq

1,800,000 taken by Germany 675,000 (420,000 taken by Germany; 240,000 taken by the Soviets in 1939; 15,000 taken by Germany in Warsaw in 1944) ~200,000 (135,000 taken in Europe, does not include Pacific or Commonwealth figures) ~130,000 (95,532 taken by Germany)

World War II Invasion of Poland, and Warsaw Uprising World War II World War II

90,368 taken by India. Later released by India in accordance with the Indo-Pakistani War Simla Agreement of 1971 ~175,000 taken by Coalition of the Gulf War Gulf War

Page 25 of 25