Page 1

war makes beasts of ordinary men and women. the cruelties perpetrated are beyond imagination.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia’s Fourth Prime Minister Founder & Chairman of Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW) NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR



Volume 1 • No.1 PP 17742/10/2013(033047)


Criminalise War, Energise Peace.

Vol. 1 • No. 1 • November 2012

Publisher KUALA LUMPUR FOUNDATION TO CRIMINALISE WAR 2ND FLOOR, NO 88, JALAN PERDANA, TAMAN TASEK PERDANA 50480 KUALA LUMPUR Tel: 603 78651461/ 603 2092 7212 / 603 2092 7210 Fax: 603 2273 2212 Email: Website: Editorial Advisors Che Kamaliah Endud - Principal, Tunku Kurshiah Collage Dato’ Freida Pilus - Advisor to the Minister of Education Editor G.S.KUMAR Editorial Board ZUHRA RAFIKOVA NUR QISTINA GANDING AAZRAA ALA MERICAN





Design & Layout RITA AZIZ



11 • KLFCW CURRENT BOARD OF TRUSTEES Printer Wisdom Ray Sdn. Bhd.








ankind face many challenges, among them economic turmoil, political upheavals, natural disasters and manmade disasters. Of these the desire to wage war as a solution to conflicts is the most destructive in terms of life and property. We have been through two World Wars with the loss of 70 million lives and trillions of dollars in destruction to property. The wars were meant to end wars for the settlement of conflicts. But we see the powerful nations still resorting to wars in order to achieve hegemony over the world. Unfortunately the victims are usually the militarily weak countries. In their effort to defend themselves those countries and people have resorted to non-conventional wars which make the world less safe for everyone. This penchant for wars is characteristic of the powerful nations. They would resort to wars simply because they believe they would achieve victory every time. But they have not really won. All that happens is more retaliation by their victims which unfortunately can be indiscriminate. In the old days wars could cause comparatively little damage. The numbers killed would also be relatively small. But the weapons of today are horrendous. The destruction is massive. Whole towns and population in the hundreds of thousands can literally be wiped out in seconds. Indeed some of the nuclear powers have the capacity to destroy the whole human race. Even the socalled conventional weapons can kill and destroy whole nations.


hope... to make more “ We people, especially the young who will be used as cannon fodder, understand the criminality of war and the need to outlaw it.


I abhor war because it is about killing people, mostly innocent people. We regard the killing of one man as murder. But we still regard the killings of thousands or even millions in war as legitimate. The killers are actually regarded as heroes. This cannot be right. We need to regard those people who send soldiers to kill people as war criminals.

It is for these and many other reasons that we have launched a campaign to make war a crime and to punish those who make war, except defensive wars. In furtherance of this campaign we are publishing a magazine devoted to the effort to Criminalise Wars. We hope through this to make more people, especially the young who will be used as cannon fodder, understand the criminality of war and the need to outlaw it. We must inculcate an anti-war culture which places a premium on peaceful solutions to conflicts. We must make war morally wrong. War is primitive. It is the barbarians’ way of achieving success. It has no place in a modern civilisation. War maims and destroys nature’s gifts to us, and leaves everything barren. Those who wage war are no better than barbarians and they must be condemned as criminals worthy of the most severe punishment. The KLFCW is an institution that seeks to make war a crime. It has to date conducted two separate Tribunal hearings that have found former leaders of the United States and Britain guilty of crimes against humanity. Some have found fault with the Tribunals’ work and its very composition. Some attacks have been personal, but our resolve is there. Never before has a country that was not the victor, nor directly involved in an armed conflict instituted such proceedings. This is something that the big powers find difficult to accept. But we will continue with our slow and painstaking investigations and research into various crimes committed against humanity in wars. Our resolve remains strong, as many victims have written to us seeking help, seeking justice. Our tasks are manifold. This publication is one of the steps. Wider avenues will be sought. More young people, not just in Malaysia, but globally will be reached out to, in our effort to make war a serious crime. We have a long journey ahead, but the first steps have been taken. God willing we will one day see war as a crime, a crime against humanity.

TUN DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD Founder & Chairman of Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War





he inaugural issue of Criminalise War gives me a great sense of satisfaction as it is the start of the mission to reach out to the people of Malaysia, especially the youngsters. For so long the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminlaise War Inc existed without much publicity or fanfare. We merely carried out our stated functions. We never envisaged having such an official publication. However when the merits of this became apparent and with the blessings of our founder, we have gone ahead. Now lie the harder tasks. We have to be very focused in our message to the readers. We have to be selective in our articles, we have to generate enough interest and participation for this publication to be successful. Success comes when the younger people of our country, initially, accept that war is not the answer to any conflict. War is destructive and never settles any issues. It is as our founder has repeatedly pointed out, murder. And when you think of recent events in this century, the invasion and destruction of Iraq and the bombings in Afghanistan, this is nothing short of mass murder. I have every confidence that this publication will carry this vital message to young Malaysians. Eventually I see a linkage being built with young people in many other countries, where this message of criminalising war is even now being spread. With such a movement, they may eventually be able to influence the powers that be to rid themselves of the vestiges of war. Armies will become no longer necessary, weapons will have no place in society. This is the long term aim of the KLFCW and like-minded agencies the world over.


We need the support and goodwill of all people to carry out our projects. While we have been fortunate to have supporters, there will always be a need to widen the pool of those in tune with us. Plans and action need time and leadership. A measure of success can only be claimed when Malaysians accept that war is criminal and that we should never be aggressors. We should never start a skirmish or cause the loss of lives. The KLFCW has succeeded in bringing justice, even if it was only declaratory, to some war victims. The message is slowly spreading around the globe. We have a Tribunal of conscience that has pronounced its verdict of guilt on several important former leaders of the western world. The official publication, Criminalise War, will provide a vehicle for victims to tell the world their plight. It will also provide details of the two Tribunal hearings and the findings. It will keep readers informed of the many actions and plans that the KLFCW has for the future. For now, we are proud that we have this publication.

DR YAACOB HUSAIN MERICAN Secretary General Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War Inc

there is a belief that the world would be safe so long as the nuclear powers provide nuclear deterrence. but the nuclear powers have shown that they are the source of military threats and not the nonnuclear powers. TUN DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD during the 1st International Conference by Centre for Defence Information Studies (CDIS) in Havana, Cuba on 21 April 2008



FORMATION OF KLFCW In 2005 the Perdana Global Peace Organization, now known as the Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF) of which His Excellency Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad is the Chairman, organized the Kuala Lumpur Global Peace Forum. The Forum, held on 14-17 December 2005 at the Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC) Kuala Lumpur was attended by more than 2000 people from all the five continents.

UNITED in the belief that peace is the essential condition for the survival and well-being of the human race,

In his keynote address at the Conference Tun Dr. Mahathir said, inter alia, that –

DETERMINED to promote peace and save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,

“We would like this Conference to be the beginning of a world-wide sustained effort to criminalise war and banish it as an option in the settlement of disputes and conflicts between nations; to recognise and define war as legitimised mass murder, as inhuman and uncivilised. We would like this conference to reject war totally and to accept peace as worthy of being the true expression of the humaneness and nobility of humankind, that peace be the ultimate measure of the level of civilisation humanity should strive for, should attain.” Tun Dr. Mahathir also said that the “primary purpose of this peace Conference… is to initiate and help make effective a sustained campaign against war, a campaign to make the killing of people as a means of solving disputes between nations illegal.” At the Forum, which spanned over 4 days, 8 separate sessions and involving more than 30 well-known national and international speakers, the participants issued a historic document known as the THE KUALA LUMPUR INITIATIVE TO CRIMINALISE WAR.

That Initiative reads as follows The Kuala Lumpur Global Peace Forum of concerned peoples from all five continents are:


OUTRAGED over the frequent resort to war in the settlement of disputes between nations, DISTURBED that militarists are preparing for more wars, TROUBLED that use of armed force increases insecurity for all, and TERRIFIED that the possession of nuclear weapons and the imminent risk of nuclear war will lead to the annihilation of life on earth. To achieve peace, we now declare that: Wars increasingly involve the killing of innocent people and are, therefore, abhorrent and criminal. Killings in war are as criminal as the killings within societies in times of peace. Since killings in peace time are subject to the domestic law of crime, killings in war must likewise be subject to the international law of crimes. This should be so irrespective of whether these killings in war are authorized or permitted by domestic law. All commercial, financial, industrial and scientific activities that aid and abet war should be criminalised.

All national leaders who initiate aggression must be subjected to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. All nations must strengthen the resolve to accept the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and institute methods to settle international disputes by peaceful means and to renounce war. Armed force shall not be used except when authorised by a Resolution passed by two-thirds majority of the total membership of the General Assembly of the United Nations. All legislators and all members of Government must affirm their belief in peace and pledge to strive for peace. Political parties all over the world must include peace as one of their principal objectives. Non-Governmental Organisations committed to the promotion of peace should be set up in all nations. Public servants and professionals, particularly in the medical, legal, educational and scientific fields, must promote peace and campaign actively against war. The media must actively oppose war and the incitement to war and consciously promote the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Entertainment media must cease to glorify war and violence and should instead cultivate the ethos of peace. All religious leaders must condemn war and promote peace. To these ends the Forum resolves to establish a permanent Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur to: IMPLEMENT this Initiative, OPPOSE policies and programmes that incite war, and SEEK the cooperation of NGOs worldwide to achieve the goals of this Initiative. The Initiative was signed by Tun Dr. Mahathir and 11 other international personalities, namely: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf Prof Francis A. Boyle Dr. Helen Caldicott Prof Michel Chossudovsky Mr Denis J. Halliday

Mr Hans-Christof Von Sponeck Dato’ Mukhriz Mahathir Dato’ Michael OK Yeoh Mr Matthias Chang Dr. Chandra Muzaffar Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi In the following year (June 2006), the Perdana Leadership Foundation organized another Peace Forum with a closed door session on the issue of “Criminalise War. Stop World War IV,” and subsequently a panel discussion on “Building An Action Plan for the Global Network for Peace.” In February 2007, the Foundation organised an International Conference and Exhibition, themed “Expose War Crimes, Criminalise War” at the Dewan Merdeka, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur. It was attended by over 3000 people from all over the globe. In his opening speech at this Conference, Tun Dr. Mahathir reminded the participants that – It is time we renounce killing masses of people in order to solve international disputes. It is time we renounce WAR! Defensive war would not be necessary in the absence of wars of aggression. Trillions of dollars would be saved as nations scale down their war machines… Unless war is made illegal the whole world will have to endure an endless state of war between the powerful and the weak. There would be no security for anyone whether involved or not involved. There would be no place in the world that would be safe. Instead of diminishing, instead of peace we are going to see endless escalating wars with ways of killing and destruction we cannot always anticipate or prepare for… War is a crime. It is primitive and not in keeping with the stage of our civilisation. It is our bounden duty to make war illegitimate, to make war a crime.” In one of the sessions at this International Conference, the participants heard a live testimony by Ali Shalah, one of the victims of torture at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq. It was at the conclusion of this Conference that a decision was made for the establishment of a formal body in the form of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War Inc (KLFCW), an entity incorporated under the laws of Malaysia, under which the Kuala NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR


Royal Charity Dinner - a major event organised by KLFCW / PGPF on 13 May 2012

Lumpur War Crimes Commission, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal and other supporting Institutions can be legally established and function.


On 17th April 2007 and pursuant to the aforesaid objectives, the Board of Trustees of the Foundation, inter alia, established the following: 1)

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission, an investigation body empowered with jurisdiction to receive and investigate complaints from victims of wars and armed conflicts in relation to crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity and other like offences as recognised under International Law.


The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, an adjudicatory body to investigate and decide on allegation of any of the aforesaid crimes.


The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Legal Team, consisting of three distinct divisions, namely:

The main objectives of the Foundation, as stated in its Statutes are, inter alia, •

To undertake all necessary measures and initiatives to criminalise war and energise peace;

To provide relief, assistance and support to individuals and communities who are suffering from the effects of war and armed conflict wherever occurring and without discrimination on the grounds of nationality, racial origin, religion, belief, age, gender or other forms of impermissible differentiations;

To promote the education of individuals and communities suffering from the effects of war or armed conflict;

To foster schemes for the relief of human suffering occasioned by war or armed conflict;

To provide for mechanisms or procedures in attainment of the above purposes.


(a) The Prosecution Divisions (prosecuting offenders before the Tribunal); (b) The Defence-Division (providing legal aid to accused, if such aid is requested); (c) The Victim Unit Division (looking after the interest of victims & their dependents during the course of the proceedings before the Tribunal).






he world is slowly but surely taking note of the bold decision taken by the panel of judges at the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (KLWCC) on November 22nd 2011, that returned a verdict of guilty against George W. Bush and Anthony L. Blair, who were tried for Crimes Against Peace in that the accused persons planned, prepared and invaded the sovereign state of Iraq on 19 March 2003 in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law.


This was a trial set in the style and pomp of the International Court, with all proceedings strictly adhering to international rules of justice and fair play. Since the two accused were not present, an amicus curiae * was appointed to provide adequate defence for the accused. Nothing can diminish the findings of the court, even though its findings are declaratory of the law. (* amicus curiae – Latin: friend of the court; is the counsel who assists the court by putting arguments in support of an interest that might not be adequately represented by the parties to the proceedings, or by arguing on behalf of a party who is otherwise unrepresented.)

Until now the international community has done nothing to right a terrible wrong. Not even the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has been prepared to file charges against the former president of the United States of America and the former prime minister of Great Britain.

Presiding judge, Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman told a packed courthouse that both the accused had acted with deceit, selectively manipulated international law and committed an unlawful act of aggression and an international crime by invading Iraq in 2003. The Tribunal also suggested that the KLWCC file a report with the ICC against both the accused under the Nuremberg principles and include reports of genocide and crimes against humanity committed by Bush and Blair. (see story on verdict, page 15)

It is noteworthy that the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has the power to refer a non-signatory to the ICC (as it did with Dafur and Libya). However, due to the tremendous influence the U.S. has in the UN, the UNSC will not refer U.S. citizens to the ICC. It was Malaysia that has taken the lead in seeking justice. It took the elder statesman of the country, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to lend his support, encouragement and leadership to convene a Tribunal made up of eminent local and international judges and to obtain this first-ever guilty verdict against the two accused.

Q: Why have you lent your support to this Tribunal? Tun Dr Mahathir: I cannot understand why when killing one person is considered murder and the perpetrator can be sentenced to death if found guilty, but for people who make decisions to wage war that can lead to the killing of hundreds or even thousands, nothing seems to be done. To me that is wrong. If you kill, that is murder. Whether it is one or hundreds, that is murder. That is why I feel that leaders of Governments must not use war as a means to settle disputes. This must be a public policy. Instead they (leaders) should seek to negotiate, go for arbitration or even take up the matter in a court of law.

L to R: Tun Dr Siti Hasmah, Tun Dr Mahathir with Dato’ Dr Yaacob Merican, the Secretary General of the KLFCW

For whatever reason, the ICC and other countries have turned a blind eye to the mass murder of some 1.4 million Iraqis since the invasion began. In fact the ICC has been approached with more than 240 complaints, but its chief prosecutor, a European, has ruled that the complaints do not have “sufficient gravity” to merit prosecution. The ICC was set up under the Rome Statute, a treaty that has been ratified by most Western countries except the U.S. The ICC has relied on this fact as grounds for not prosecuting U.S. citizens.

This Tribunal could not have taken place without the support of one man – Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. The former premier was ever present at the four day hearings, even waiting for the panel of judges to reach their verdict on the final day. Tun Dr Mahathir granted The Globalist an exclusive interview in which he talked about the tribunal, the move to criminalize war and other topics.



But these people (the two accused and others) are so powerful that nobody will take them to court. As members of civilized society, we should punish those who wage war that in turn leads to mass killing. I think it is wrong to make war legitimate. Of course defence is permissible. If you are attacked, you must defend, but to have aggressive designs against another country, that is wrong. Q: But warfare has always been a part and parcel of mankind for so long. How then can we prevent or at least minimise such actions? Tun Dr Mahathir: You may recall that in the early years slavery was accepted. Everybody had slaves, whether you were Europeans or Asians. And these slaves were treated very badly, in fact in many instances, not like human beings at all. In the olden days when an army of one nation defeated the army of another nation, the captured soldiers became slaves of the victorious army. This of course does not happen nowadays. The fight against slavery was a long and hard struggle and today there are no longer slaves. So why is it that when one wages war and people are killed, it is not considered murder? We are civilized people, and civilized people must uphold the sanctity of life. If you uphold the sanctity of life of one person who is killed, then why is it that you do not apply the same sanctity for the millions of people who have been killed in war?

That is why we feel that if the world does not punish those who wage war, then we should punish them. Usually the Tribunals are set up by the victors, who are obviously bias. A judge should be free from any influence. So for justice, you should have an international court. Unfortunately, nobody takes up the cases against those who wage war. So we have decided to have this Tribunal. I know that there is another such Tribunal in Brussels. Eventually I believe that war would be made a crime.

Q: But the verdict in Kuala Lumpur will not be enforced. Tun Dr Mahathir: Well it may not be enforced, but the world will know the decision of the Tribunal and the world can do what is right.


Some countries may not allow these people (the accused) to enter their territory. They will be ostracized by some. But that is the limit of our jurisdiction. We have no means to enforce the decision of the Court, but not being able to enforce does not mean we cannot be in a position to pass judgment.

Q: What then would Tun suggest for us to be rid of warfare, where such killings do not take place, and where ‘might is not right’? Tun Dr Mahathir: I believe that over time, people will come around to the conclusion that war is not right. War is a very primitive way of settling conflicts. We claim to be civilized people, we respect the sanctity of life, we value life. In any society, killing of a person is a crime. When they started the struggle against slavery, it took them a long time to succeed. William Wilberforce was the man who started this struggle (against slavery) in the British Parliament. He began by introducing legislation making trade in slavery illegal as the first step. And that eventually led to slavery being abolished. I think slavery is a lesser crime than killing, but while people have rejected slavery, they seem to have permitted killing. That is why there is a contradiction here in terms of our values. On the one hand we say that killing one person is murder and whoever did it must be hanged if found guilty, but when millions are killed, nothing is done about it.

Q: Do you have any suggestions that you would like to put forth to rectify the injustices? Tun Dr Mahathir: It’s a matter of perception. Over time if we go on pointing out that war is murder - mass murder - people may come around. However as with the struggle against slavery, it will take many years. People will eventually accept that war is a crime, that killing is a crime. You may ask, what can the people do? They can force their Parliament(s) to abolish war. In fact, Japan has already decided that they will not fight a war ever again. They have “selfdefence forces”. So it is possible for others to follow suit.

We have to get legislators to enact such laws. The electorate can then declare that they will only vote for those legislators who will agree to pass a motion in Parliament to make war a crime. Maybe the pressure (on legislators) would be minimal in the beginning, but over time, more and more people will come to accept that killing is wrong. Q: Do you think that Malaysia can take the lead here and make war a crime? Tun Dr Mahathir: In time we can. But remember that defence is permitted. We have the right to defend ourselves against aggressors or those who invade our shores. But we should not wage war against any other nation. I think that in time, when the people accept that war settles nothing, but creates misery and suffering and lives are lost, there will be a move to stop all kinds of wars.” The former Prime Minister is well known for his frank and candid views on local and international issues. Tun Mahathir was just as forthcoming when asked about the Arab Spring – the struggle, the tragedies and the triumphs.

Tun Dr Mahathir: They say that you get the government that you deserve. If the people tolerate a dictatorship, then that’s what they get. However if the people want change, then it’s up to them to bring about the change. There is bound to be resistance by the dictators and those around them. But some people may even be willing to give up their own lives to bring about change. And it also depends on the strength of the movement wanting change. If it’s only a small group, they may be jailed. But if there is mass support, then change can take place.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad with his wife Tun Dr Siti Hasmah

They call it the Arab Spring. It’s not spring at all. It’s about killing, people from both sides (of the conflict) have died, and that is not right at all. The best thing is for the leader(s) to accept that the people they once ruled want change. They should step down. Take the case of the Tunisian President, he saw that he had no support, so he resigned. Mubarak of Egypt also resigned. But others have clung on and it has cost lives and misery.

Q: Do you think that the Arab Spring would lead to the Americans withdrawing, at least partially from the Arab lands? Tun Dr Mahathir: They will not withdraw. They will still be there under some guise. These Arab countries have huge reserves of oil, so they will be there. The host countries will have to be mindful of how these people are treated. If anything is done to (American) citizens, you can expect a reaction in a powerful way.

With regards foreign policy, take Libya for instance. They may not be openly supporting the Americans, but the new government may be so grateful to NATO, that they may open up the country for investment and exploitation. NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR


Summary of

Trial no.1


he Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal sat in November 2011 to hear charges of “crimes against peace” against George W. Bush and Tony Blair, head of their respective governments during the invasion of Iraq on 19 March 2003. Both Defendants did not attend the hearing. The Tribunal then appointed the Head of the Defence Division as Amicus Curiae to represent the Defendants. The original panel of Judges started with 7 eminent members. After a preliminary objection was raised by Amicus Curiae, Judge Niloufer Bhagwat from India, recused herself. Judge Zakaria Yatim also recused himself on the first day due to ill-health. After several days of presentation of the evidence and submissions by both the prosecution and the Amici


Curiae, the Tribunal ruled that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was an unlawful act of aggression and an international crime and that “It cannot be justified under any reasonable interpretation of international law. It violates the outer limits of laws regulating the use of force. It amounts to mass murder. Unlawful use of force in Iraq threatens to return us to a world in which the law of the jungle prevails over the rule of law, with potentially disastrous consequences for the human rights not only of the Iraqis but of people throughout the region and the world.” The future of the UN and of the international law of war is also at stake. The unauthorized military action in Iraq undermines the system of collective security embedded in the UN Charter in order to protect humanity from a recurrence of the carnage of World War II.

At the hearing of Nuremberg, Robert Jackson J, who had stepped down from the US Supreme Court to prosecute these defendants said, “We are setting up one standard of behaviour to be applied not only to the Nazis defendants but also to ourselves,” and a generation later, that is what we are asking you, the judges of this Tribunal to do: To apply the exact same standards of international law to these American government officials that the Americans applied to the Nazis at Nuremberg. No more, no less; but exactly the same, just as Robert Jackson J said should be done in the future.

Prof Francis Boyle, Prosecutor

We want to reach the planners, the designers, the inciters, the leaders, and their ring of legal advisors who have crafted and shaped the evil. And we want to ring in this message, “Be you ever so mighty that you think you cannot be reached – you CAN be reached.” Prof Gurdial Singah Nijar, Chief Prosecutor

War is like a black hole. The general theory of relativity posits that there are black holes, and in the centre of black holes there is the singularity where the laws of physics cease to exist. War does that to laws of man. To international laws even.

Jason Kay, Amicus Curiae



Summary of Trial


t the conclusion of the 5-day hearing on 11 May 2012, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal found all the 8 accused persons, namely, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzalez, David Addington, William Haynes II, Jay Bybee and John Choon Yoo guilty as charged and convicted as war criminals for committing torture, and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of the complainants (war crime victims). Under Article 31 of Chapter VI of Part 2 of the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (the Charter), the Tribunal recommends to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (the Commission) to submit this finding of conviction of the Tribunal, together with a record of the Tribunal’s Proceedings, to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.


no. 2

Further, under Article 32 of the Charter, the Tribunal recommends to the Commission that the names of the 8 convicted persons be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and be publicized accordingly. The Tribunal also recommends to the Commission to give the widest international publicity to this conviction and the grant of reparation for the complainants (war crime victims) as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations to institute prosecutions if any of these 8 convicted persons enter their jurisdiction. The Tribunal expresses its hope that the complainants in this case will, in the near future, find a state or international judicial entity competent, able and willing to exercise jurisdiction and to enforce the verdict of this Tribunal against the 8 convicted persons and their government.


TRIAL - Desmond Tutu


ver since the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal found George W. Bush and Anthony L. Blair guilty of crimes against humanity last November, the world has been watching and waiting for some kind of reaction to the pronouncements. While the Western countries paid scant attention to the verdict, which cannot at this stage be enforced, others have acted in their own way. There are now several countries where the two former leaders would find themselves unwelcome and perhaps even detained if they went there. The wheels of justice, one is constantly reminded, are slow to move. However in recent times, there seems to be a move toward bringing the pair to justice.

For one, the very eminent Archbishop Desond Tutu has called for Tony Blair and George Bush to be hauled before the international criminal court in The Hague. At the same time the cleric delivered a damning critique of the physical and moral devastation caused by the Iraq war. The actions of Tutu, a Nobel peace prize winner and hero of the anti-apartheid movement, marks the first time that someone of international standing has publicly and passionately accused the former British and US leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction which were used as an excuse to invade Iraq. The Archbishop went on to say that the invasion



left the world more destabilised and divided “than any other conflict in history”. Writing in The Observer, a British newspaper, Tutu has blamed the controversial US and UK-led action to oust Saddam Hussein in 2003 for having created the backdrop for the civil war in Syria and a possible wider Middle East conflict involving Iran. “The then leaders of the United States and Great Britain,” Tutu wrote, “fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us.” To many of us involved in the workings of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War, it was the renowned Archbishop’s call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague that has been most interesting. Claiming that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones, Tutu said the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and Bush to be tried at the ICC. “On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague,” he wrote. The International Criminal Court (ICC) was set up to hear cases on genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. To date, 16 cases have been brought before the court but only one, that of Thomas Lubanga, a rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), has been completed. He was sentenced earlier this year to 14 years’ imprisonment for his part in war crimes in his home country. The Chief Prosecutor has never brought charges against any Western leader to date. It was only the KLFCW that has taken that step on behalf of all victims of the criminal action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Tony Blair has been attempting to rehabilitate himself in public life after his term as Prime


Minister. But Desmond Tutu’s blast at him is evidence of the shadow still cast by Iraq over Blair’s future. A longtime critic of the Iraq war, the archbishop pulled out of a South African conference on leadership in August because Blair, who was paid 2m rand (£150,000) for his time, was attending. Tutu had agreed to speak without a fee. In his article, the archbishop argues that as well as the death toll, there has been a heavy moral cost to civilisation, with no gain. “Even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world. “Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?” Blair and Bush, he says, set an appalling example. “If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth?” he asks. “If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?” We reproduce here the full article that appeared in The Observer on 1 September 2012: Anti-apartheid hero attacks former prime minister over ‘double standards on war crimes’ “The immorality of the United States and Great Britain’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history. Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK fabricated the grounds

to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us. If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth? Days before George W Bush and Tony Blair ordered the invasion of Iraq, I called the White House and spoke to Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser, to urge that United Nations weapons inspectors be given more time to confirm or deny the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Should they be able to confirm finding such weapons, I argued, dismantling the threat would have the support of virtually the entire world. Ms Rice demurred, saying there was too much risk and the president would not postpone any longer. On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers’ circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush’s chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein? The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its byall-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.

Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope? Leadership and morality are indivisible. Good leaders are the custodians of morality. The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level. If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children? My appeal to Mr Blair is not to talk about leadership, but to demonstrate it. You are a member of our family, God’s family. You are made for goodness, for honesty, for morality, for love; so are our brothers and sisters in Iraq, in the US, in Syria, in Israel and Iran. I did not deem it appropriate to have this discussion at the Discovery Invest Leadership Summit in Johannesburg last week.(last August) As the date drew nearer, I felt an increasingly profound sense of discomfort about attending a summit on “leadership” with Mr Blair. I extend my humblest and sincerest apologies to Discovery, the summit organisers, the speakers and delegates for the lateness of my decision not to attend.”

On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague. But even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.



Find peaceful end to territorial rows


AR RESOLVES NOTHING: Past experiences prove that the most sensible solution is to place claims before the court

I AM sorry to see dispute between China and Japan, and Korea and Japan over the offshore islands. Neighbours will always have problems over overlapping claims. But neighbours should not go to war or use violence in asserting their claims. Malaysia has borders with five countries of Southeast Asia -- namely Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Indonesia and the Philippines. Once there was a confrontation by Indonesia though it was not about overlapping claims. To avoid wars and confrontations, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines formed ASA, the Association of Southeast Asia. This was later expanded to include Singapore and Thailand. Later, all the countries of Southeast Asia joined the association. Many believed this was an economic community like the European Economic Community. But the real objective of Asean was to provide a forum for conflict resolution. It was launched after the end of the Indonesian confrontation against Malaysia. The association brought leaders of these countries together during frequent meetings. Knowing each other is important if problems between the countries are to be resolved. There is a Malay saying “Tak kenal maka tak cinta” (because you don’t know each other, you do not love each other). The first problem faced by Malaysia involving overlapping claims was over a triangular area of sea in the Gulf of Thailand where the northeastern border of Malaysia meets the southeastern border of Thailand. Malaysia’s projection of the border of its continental shelf was towards the northeast while Thailand’s was more southeastwards. After repeated attempts by the respective foreign ministry officials of the two countries failed, the prime minister of


Malaysia met the prime minister of Thailand and decided that minerals, oil and gas discovered in the triangular area of sea between the two projected continental shelf borders should be shared equally, 50/50 between the two countries. A joint development plan by a joint development authority was put in place and today, the gas produced in the area is indeed shared 50/50 between Malaysia and Thailand. Then, there was a dispute over two beautiful islands in the seas at the border between the Malaysian state of Sabah and Indonesia. Prolonged negotiations and haggling by the two countries failed to resolve the issue. Both countries refused to give in or surrender their claims.

Eventually, both agreed to go to the World Court. It was a tedious process. Documents and other proofs had to be presented to the court by both sides. After a considerable length of time and numerous hearings, the court decided that the islands belonged to Malaysia. Indonesia was unhappy of course. But Indonesia and Malaysia had both given the undertaking to accept whatever decision made by the court. And they both honoured their promise. During the British period, they set up lighthouses on several islands in the Malay peninsula, of which Singapore was then a part, its governor being the High Commissioner of the Malay States. For convenience, the lighthouses were administered from Singapore. After the separation between Malaysia and Singapore, the island nation claimed that a rock on which a lighthouse had been built by the British in the sea between the southern tip of the Malay peninsula and Singapore belonged to Singapore. Malaysia disputed this claim for various reasons. After years of trying to resolve the claim through negotiation, the two countries decided to go to the World Court. To cut a long story short, the court decided the rock belonged to Singapore. Malaysia was disappointed but having given our undertaking, accepted the decision of the court. There was also a dispute over the sea offshore Sarawak in the island of Borneo between Malaysia and Brunei. Believing that the sea belonged to Malaysia, Petronas, the Malaysian national petroleum company, began exploration in the waters concerned. Brunei sent its warships and demanded that the Malaysians cease their operations. Later, the claims were discussed by the leaders of the two countries and it was agreed that the sea belonged to Brunei but the exploitation should be by Malaysia’s national petroleum company. Finally, the Philippines claimed the whole state of Sabah on Borneo island. But the Philippines did not join Indonesia in that country’s confrontation. There has been no hostility between Malaysia and the Philippines, nor has there been any negotiation. It is not a very satisfactory state of affairs. The problem is still there. But diplomatic relations between the two countries seem to be unimpaired. The point I am trying to make is that the Japanese, Koreans and China should not resort to violent confrontation nor stir up emotions which can become uncontrollable. The claims cannot be resolved through wars or through

threatening acts like sending warships or putting up flags. Wars, if resorted to, could spread to become an all-out war between the claimants. People would die. The damage caused would be worse than the gain that the islands present. The tension created by wars will damage not only the economies of the belligerents but the region as well, perhaps even the world as the United States might get involved. No matter who wins the war, the loser would still dispute the possession of the island. Currently, there is a dispute between Russia, the winners in the last war, and Japan, the losers, over islands north of Japan. Fortunately, the confrontation has not escalated to what we are seeing in China and Japan today.

War resolves nothing despite the loss of lives, property and the huge cost of modern war. Even a limited war can bankrupt nations. Just look at the experience of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only sensible solution to the dispute is to agree to negotiate, arbitrate or, failing this, to put the claims before the World Court. Someone will win and someone will lose of course. But war would also result in the same result. In fact, war is worst because apart from the high cost, the claims will still remain after the loss of lives and property. In fact, whatever wealth the islands will yield would probably be less than the total amount expended in the war. Asia has had enough wars in the past. Let us keep East Asia peaceful. What we gain from peace will be a thousand times greater than what we can gain from the disputed islands. Today, we talk of the rule of law. If we really do believe in it, then we should demonstrate it by resorting to the courts to settle disputes between nations as well. We have to accept that we can lose as much as we can win. That is what submission to the rule of law is about. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad *This article appeared in The New Straits Times on 20 September 2012



This approach is the right one, reaching out to the young, telling them about war, what it really means and why it must be criminalised. ❑

Prof Michel Chossudovsky




ne of the principal aims of this publication, Criminalise War, is to spread the message of the futility of war to the younger generation. Towards that end, a Charter has been created for such organizations to flourish in schools all over the country. Support for such a move has come from many quarters. While it is an accepted fact that any “results” will take time and a great deal of effort, the fact is this move must take place now, and it must reach the young of this country soon. The publishers approached several prominent individuals to seek their views and support. One, Prof Michel Chossudovsky heads the Centre for Research on Globalization based in Canada. He is also a signatory to the Initiative that led to the establishment of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Foundation. When asked firstly about the verdicts by the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal that found ex-US President George W Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony L Blair guilty of crimes against humanity, the professor put it this way: “The decision of the Court has been based on extensive documentation and evidence of war crimes and crimes


against humanity. How this will affect the accused is part of the historical process, what I mean by that is that after the judgment of this court, the verdict becomes public knowledge and it is distributed world-wide. My institution – The Centre for Research on Globalization - our aim is to make not just the judgment known but all the testimony available to the broadest possible audience world wide. “This drive to bring the accused to justice has been raised in many other places and institutions, but I think that this (KL) has been the most comprehensive procedure, it has collected evidence over several years and it has finally reached its verdict,. I should add that the accused are not the only criminals on the block, we are dealing with something far more complex, such as the criminalization of the states of western governments, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and their allies. We don’t resolve this by identifying the personae – we have to carry this to another stage, which is the criminlisation of institutions, in other words – it pertains to the US and UN where these acts are endorsed, where war crimes have had endorsement, acts of war by the major states, the UN Security Council itself.. We are talking about Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Libya, Syria, all places where the UN is serving as a front to those who commit crimes against humanity.”

To him, this publication is most timely for as he put it: “Any young person who is interested in history can review and ponder for himself or herself that wars never solve anything. In fact they add to the misery of all people. Young people should now try another course of action – that of peace. To try and avoid by all means war or conflict. We have to give dialogue a chance. The UN Charter on every page makes the case for mediation and conflict resolution by peaceful means and dialogue. The political will has to be developed to try that road towards peace rather than the other road toward war.”

I would say that the ones who are identified as heroes of war are in fact victims of war. They are not heroes. And the young people must be challenged to discuss this, to debate this. To think about it. And if that happens, I would say, there is a chance that peace will prevail. ❑

Hans-Christof Von Sponeck When asked about the muted response that newspapers in this country have shown: “After several visits to Malaysia, I can say that your mainstream media is very much in the same mould as their western counterparts, it’s a camouflage for them. They either do not cover events such as this (Tribunal) or they merely carry a story in a box with very little accurate information. “So that is a media that you cannot depend upon. This is despite the fact that this Foundation is the initiative of a former Prime Minister. The initiative has to come through what is being done with this publication, and reaching out to the young, the school children, say those above 12 years of age, because by then they can understand and form opinions. It’s a bit too late if you try and get them at University, since by then they are under the influence of professors and lecturers. So get them young, and not just in KL (Kuala Lumpur) but in many other parts of the country. “….so while I may not be able to contribute articles, I would be better placed to help “sensitise” the young by way of a lecture series, which I shall certainly consider. This approach is the right one, reaching out to the young, telling them about war, what it really means and why it must be criminalised. Another prominent former diplomat who spoke to us was Hans-Christof Von Sponeck, who had served as an Assistant UN Secretary General in charge of humanitarian programme in Iraq.

Q: How do we get this political will? A: “To young people I would say that the best weapon they could develop for themselves would be the information to understand the situation, understand the past and to challenge those who want to go the way of war. So knowledge is an important base to make that difference between sliding into another conflict or promoting peace. “If we have media that promote conflict, that promote confrontation and promote hatred, I will say that young people will try and go that way. So it’s also a question of national leadership in Europe, in Asia and other parts of the world, in this ever smaller world, to set examples to show that there are alternatives to solving problems and conflicts. The youth, absolvable as they are, will want to try that which is preached. So we have to ensure that they are given the right information. Q: How can we take this message to the young? A: “To continuously remind them of what UNSECO that right from the beginning of its existence stated that if wars start in the minds of men, then peace can also start in the minds of men. “It’s the question of directing your attention and socializing people towards peace – and we have not done that. What we have done is glamourised the uniform, we have glamourised weaponry, we have glamourised wars and the so-called heros of wars. I would say that the ones who are identified as heroes of war are in fact victims of war. They are not heroes. And the young people must be challenged to discuss this, to debate this. To think about it. And if that happens, I would say, there is a chance that peace will prevail. “We all have our contributions to make, wherever we are, wherever we stand in life, whatever our experience is, experience shows that peace is a much greater achievement and of much greater value than it is to go to war and brutalise minds and create more victims and then when it is too late, start to glorify them.”



Would You Trust A US President?


e have recently come across two compelling although separate incidents and which have taken place in two different times. On examining the evidence of both these cases, we are prompted to ask the question: Can You Trust The US President? Four years ago Americans had the courage to elect their first African-American president. He rode the popular tide with promises to end the torture and inhumane treatment of “prisoners” held at various facilities. Those who strongly opposed America’s invasion of Iraq and the bombings in Afghanistan were beguiled into the hope that Barak Obama would right all the wrongs of the previous occupant of the White House. Now almost four years later, and seeking a further term in office, the promises of the US President have not been met. At the end of World War II, most young people, this writer included, grew up with stories of heroism during the war years,

of the brave battles waged against a conquering and cruel force that subjected countries in Southeast Asia to its yoke. And to glamorise all this were the numerous movies of the great battles in Europe and other parts of this region. Hollywood was seen as the bringer of good cheer, for the good guys always won. Comics were another influence, Batman and Robin, The Lone Ranger and Superman, along with several more such creations all played their part in turning young minds the American way. They were after all the “good guys” who conquered evil and defeated the “bad guys”. Such was the influence of these movies that America became the champion of the world. The evil was seen as the Communist regimes of the Soviet Union, the Eastern Bloc, China, Vietnam and North Korea. But events over the last 20-30 years have shown that we have to re-think this perception we have of the “good guys”. The destruction of Iraq, the invasion of a sovereign nation, the aerial bombardment of a helpless Afghanistan and the continued drone attacks on civilian targets, have all taken a heavy toll. The Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War has in the course of two Tribunal hearings found former US President George W. Bush and British’s ex premier Anthony L. Blair guilty of crimes against humanity. Several other senior US officials were also convicted for their actions against ordinary citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan. So there was a glimmer of hope when Barak Obama came to power that things would be made right again. Alas, what a letdown! This thus brings up the subject: Can we trust a US President? This writer cites two events to make the point. These two events had taken place almost 50 years apart, but they point to a chilling verdict of guilty on the part of the man in the White House on both occasions. One involved the Soviet Union and the other of course US troops and their “terror” squads. At the last hearing of the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal in May 2012, testimony was heard from three separate witnesses who underwent inhumane treatment, torture and imprisonment. One was an Iraqi woman who was forced out of her house, stripped of her clothes and her dignity just because they suspected her of siding with the insurgents. The other two men suffered harsh treatment of wrongful confinement. The testimonies of these three


were among the facts taken into consideration by the panel of judges before they rendered their guilty verdict on all the accused. Take these two cases and look at them carefully and judge for yourself, who the real guilty were. When Barak Obama was campaigning for the Presidency of the United States four years ago, he pledged to bring home the troops by ending the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan and shut down the prison facility in the island of Guantanamo Bay, which is in Cuba, a sovereign state.

Four years on, as he campaigns for a second term in office, Gitmo (as the Cuban facility is called) is still the torture centre that it has been, the war in Iraq is still on-going perhaps on a scaled down basis, Nato forces supposedly run the war in Afghanistan, and none of the President’s promises have been kept. In fact, the Obama administration has gone even further to absolve US officials and troops of any accountability for their actions in these various areas. There is now international displeasure over the cases of two detainees who were tortured to death, but whose handlers have been apportioned no blame nor punished for causing their deaths. Why, one may ask? The US Attorney General, Eric Holder has announced the closing without charges of the only two cases under investigation relating to the US torture tactics: they related to the 2002 death of an Afghan detainee at a secret CIA prison near Kabul (the Afghan capital) and the other, the 2003 death of an Iraqi citizen while in CIA custody at Abu Ghraib prison facility in Iraq. Many people and international commentators have termed these decisions as the “Obama administration’s aggressive fullscale whitewashing of the “war on terror” crimes committed by Bush officials as being now complete. That decision by the Attorney General eliminates the last possibility of any criminal charges being brought as a result of the brutal interrogations carried out by the CIA. What a farce this has been and it is appropriate to review the timeline of how Obama officials acted to shield Bush torturers from all accountability. During his 2008 campaign for president, Obama repeatedly vowed that, while he opposed

“partisan witch-hunts”, he would instruct his attorney general to “immediately review” the evidence of criminality in these torture programmes because “nobody is above the law.” Yet, almost immediately after winning the 2008 election, Obama, before he was inaugurated, made clear that he was opposed to any such investigations, citing what he called “a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards”. Throughout the first several months of his presidency, his top political aides, such as the Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel and his press secretary Robert Gibbs publicly – and inappropriately – pressured the justice department to refrain from any criminal investigations. Over and over, they repeated the Orwellian mantra that such investigations were objectionable because “we must look forward, not backward”. As Gibbs put it in April 2009, when asked to explain Obama’s opposition, “the president is focused on looking forward. That’s why.” In sum, the Obama administration has been desperate to ensure that there will be no accountability or even that meaningful investigations ever take place. That is almost certainly due to the observation made in the New York Times:

“Because every president eventually leaves office, incoming chief executives have an incentive to quash investigations into their predecessor’s tenure.” In other words, Obama is motivated to shield Bush officials from accountability for their crimes in the hope that once Obama leaves office, he, too, will be gifted identical immunity from the rule of law.

Even Roosevelt

was part of a

Cover Up

During World War II, American POWs (prisoners of war) sent secret coded messages to Washington with news of a Soviet atrocity: In 1943 they saw rows of corpses in an advanced state of decay in the Katyn forest, on the western edge of Russia, proof that the killers could not have been the Nazis who had only recently occupied the area. The testimony about the infamous massacre of Polish officers might have lessened the tragic fate that befell Poland under NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR


The testimony about the infamous massacre of Polish officers might have lessened the tragic fate that befell Poland under the Soviets, some scholars believe. Instead, it mysteriously vanished into the heart of American power. The long-held suspicion is that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn’t want to anger Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, an ally whom the Americans were counting on to defeat Germany and Japan during World War II.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt the Soviets, some scholars believe. Instead, it mysteriously vanished into the heart of American power. The long-held suspicion is that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn’t want to anger Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, an ally whom the Americans were counting on to defeat Germany and Japan during World War II.

and intellectual elite that would have put up stiff resistance to Soviet control. The men were among Poland’s most accomplished — officers and reserve officers who in their civilian lives worked as doctors, lawyers, teachers, or as other professionals. Their loss has proven an enduring wound to the Polish nation.

Documents released recently lend weight to the belief that suppression within the highest levels of the U.S. government helped cover up Soviet guilt in the killing of some 22,000 Polish officers and other prisoners in the Katyn forest and other locations in 1940.

In the early years after the war, outrage by some American officials over the concealment inspired the creation of a special U.S. Congressional committee to investigate Katyn.

Historians describe it as important. The most dramatic revelation so far is the evidence of the secret codes sent by the two American POWs — something historians were unaware of and which adds to evidence that the Roosevelt administration knew of the Soviet atrocity relatively early on. The declassified documents also show the United States maintaining that it couldn’t conclusively determine guilt until a Russian admission in 1990 — a statement that looks improbable given the huge body of evidence of Soviet guilt that had already emerged decades earlier. Historians say the new material helps to flesh out the story of what the U.S. knew and when. The Soviet secret police killed the 22,000 Poles with shots to the back of the head. Their aim was to eliminate a military


In a final report released in 1952, the committee declared there was no doubt of Soviet guilt, and called the massacre “one of the most barbarous international crimes in world history.” It found that Roosevelt’s administration suppressed public knowledge of the crime, but said it was out of military necessity. It also recommended the government bring charges against the Soviets at an international tribunal — something never acted upon. Despite the committee’s strong conclusions, the White House maintained its silence on Katyn for decades, showing an unwillingness to focus on an issue that would have added to political tensions with the Soviets during the Cold War. So the question remains, Can You Trust An American President?

Spotlight On An Oppressed Community



“the solution must be the right of the Rohingyas to go back and live in the state where they have been living all these years”

❑ Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad


n 17th September 2012, Perdana Global Peace Foundation organised a one-day international conference titled, “Plight of the Rohingya: Solutions?” attended by participants comprising representatives from the diplomatic corps, international organisations, parliamentarians, human rights groups, academia, civil society, non-governmental organisations and media, as well as leaders of Rohingya organisations from several countries. Various papers were presented and at the end of the conference, a resolution was drafted, signed by all the speakers of the conference. In brief, it noted:• with serious concern that the Rakhine Buddhist community and in particular, the Rohingya Muslim community, suffered from sectarian violence that erupted in Rakhine State in June 2012, • the current tragic situation facing the Rohingyas and continued statelessness that makes them highly vulnerable to abuses, • with concern the thousands of displaced and stateless Rohingyas living throughout the world,


• that the government of Myanmar has failed to observe its responsibility to fulfil its international human rights and humanitarian obligations with respect to the Rohingyas, • the systematic crimes against the Rohingya community, and in its resolution the Conference:• strongly condemns the continuing acts of violence, rape, beatings, burning of dwellings, killings, arbitrary arrests, detentions and enforced disappearances of the Rohingyas, • calls on the government of Myanmar to recognise the legitimate rights of the Rohingyas, to amend the 1982 Citizenship Act to recognise or grant citizenship to persons of Rohingya ethnicity, and to carry out full and fair investigations against individuals and parties responsible for criminal offenses during sectarian violence in Rakhine state.

In the words of Tun Mahathir during the keynote address, “We are here to find solutions to a problem that has been with us for a very long time. … We expect that the state of Myanmar, which is a very rich state, would be able to give its people a good life, and that good life should not only be confined to one segment of the population, but for everyone who claims to be the citizen of Myanmar. … and the solution must be the right of the Rohingyas to go back and live in the state where they have been living all these years, to join their compatriots who are there and for the whole population of Rohingyas to be recognized as citizens of Myanmar.” NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR


“We’ve been trying to adopt negotiation as a means to solve the issue, but it is complicated because it involves regional and international interference.” ❑

Mother Superior Agnes Mariam, Melkite Catholic Church from Homs, Syria



– A PLEA FOR UNDERSTANDING Most of us have read on a daily basis in newspapers the conflict in Syria, the failed attempt by the former United Nations Secretary General Koffi Annan to broker a peace and the heavy death toll that the fighting has caused. This has lasted now for more than a year and no lasting peace seems in sight. And while the rest of the world watches with bated breath, Syrians themselves are attempting to end


the warfare in their ancient land – considered by many as the seat of civilization. Ancient cities and a way of life is now being threatened. But who is to blame? There is a great need to truly understand the conflict in Syria. This was the message that was stressed by Mother Superior Agnes Mariam from the Melkite Catholic Church in Homs, Syria, when

she told a small but captive audience that the situation made Syrians feel unimportant as the media only reported on certain sects of the population. The mainstream media has been reporting partially true and false stories about the Syrian uprising, many of which do not represent Syria as a whole, said Mother Superior Agnes.. “From the start of uprising, we’ve seen that the reality was not being reported truthfully and by giving speeches at chosen countries, including Malaysia, I hope that I can spread the message,” she said. Mother Agnes, who is also a member of the Mussalaha initiative for a reconciliation, said there was a need for reformation and democratic change without the use of violence or resorting to war. “We’ve been trying to adopt negotiation as a means to solve the issue, but it is complicated because it involves regional and international interference.

Most Rev Tan Sri Murphy Nicholas Xavier Pakiam at the registration counter of the Dialogue on the Syrian Uprising ❑

“We are coming together to build a new social group and this comes from the desire of the people as we consider the regime in Syria as fallen.”

Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF) Chairman Tan Sri Norian Mai (left) and PGPF Treasurer Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Hj. Abdul Halil Hj. Abd Mutalif (right) in a tête-à-tête with Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam during the dialogue session ❑




Left to right: Tan Sri Norian Mai and Alan Lonergan


Left to right: Mother Agnes, Dr. Zulaiha Ismail, and Datuk Badariah Arshad

Often referring to herself as a simple nun, Mother Agnes was clear and forthright in her speech that the truth must be reported by the mainstream media. Not showing nor denying support for the current regime, she reminded the audience that Syria has known nothing but one-man rule for more than 40 years. From the days of Hafez Al Assad to the present leadership of Bassar Al Assad, it has been a tight fisted regime. Democracy she noted takes time to be in place. Countries like Malaysia, she noted, live in prosperity because of the rule of law and people living in harmony.

Mother Agnes is a leading proponent of the Musaalaha Initiative that seeks reconciliation for the war torn country. So passionate is she about the plight of Syrians that she continuously addressed various issues that divide her country now. Repeatedly she drew attention to the fact that she was a nun with no political motive except to tell the world the true situation of the Syrian conflict. War has caused havoc in Syria. This conflict has lasted for more than a year. Families have lost loved ones, bread winners and even children. How long more will this suffering go on?

Recalling that Syria is a proud nation that has long lived peacefully with a diverse and multi-religious population, Mother Agnes invited Malaysians to visit Syria and see for themselves the true situation in her country.

Mother Agnes Mariam was on her way to Australia and had only made the brief stop-over in Kuala Lumpur to address the dialogue session organised by the Perdana Global Peace Foundation.


a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. we have taken many steps. let us march forward in this struggle to achieve true civilisation, to criminalise war.

TUN DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD during “Expose War Crimes - Criminalise War” Conference in Kuala Lumpur on 5 February 2007



KLFCW November 2012 Events [Venue: Dewan Tun Dr. Ismail, Putra World Trade Centre PWTC, Kuala Lumpur]





Forum on 9/11 Keynote Address by H.E. Tun Dr. Mahathir


Mon 19 – Thurs 22 9am to 5pm Nov 2012

War Crimes Exhibition


Tues 20 Nov 2012

9am to 5pm

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission Hearing on Palestine (First Session)


Wed 21 Nov 2012

9am to 5pm

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission Hearing on Palestine (Second Session)


International Conference on War-affected Children:


Mon 19 Nov 2012

9am to 5pm

Thurs 22 Nov 2012 9am to 2pm

• Keynote Address – by H.E. Tun Dr. Mahathir (Founder/Chairman KLFCW)

Moderator Dato’ Freida Pilus Advisor to the Minister of Education

Rapporteur Puan Che Kamaliah Endud Principal, Tunku Kurshiah College

• Legal Protection of Children in Armed Conflict: The Iraqi Children Genocide Prof. Francis A. Boyle (Professor Of International Law at the University of Illinois)




Thurs 22 Nov 2012 9am to 2pm


Host • Khmer Rouge: Atrocities Committed on Children H.E. Ms. Chea Leang (National CoProsecutor of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia) (ECCC)


• What War Does to Children – Prof. Paola Manduca (Geneticist, University of Genoa, Italy)

• Effects of War on Children’s Health Dr Raj Abdul Karim (President of Malaysian AIDS Council)

• Children’s Charter to Criminalise War H.E. Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah bt Mohd Ali (Trustee, KLFCW)

Thurs 22 Nov 2012 8pm to 11pm

A Night To Remember Our War-Affected Children • Launching of the Criminalise War Club (Malaysian Chapter) • Proclamation and Inscribing of the Children’s Charter to Criminalise War • Launching of KLFCW’s magazine, “Criminalise War” • Performance by the Tunku Kurshiah Orchestra • The World at War... Tell me why? We need to learn to live - Poetry Recitation and Songs of Hope with Video Presentation by Cempaka Group of Schools





Editorial Children are the pulse of any family unit. In turn they become the conscience of a nation. For they are ones who are most affected by violence and destruction. And when they tell their stories, all will listen. They have the simple “truth factor� in them and when they describe in their very own language what they see or feel, grown ups will listen.

It was that same evocative feeling that was conveyed when I first saw a letter written by a young 7 year old girl lamenting the sufferings of her fellow beings in a far distant place. It was a plea that came from the heart. And that same letter is reproduced here for all readers to understand what suffering and hardship is through the eyes of an innocent girl. She is grown up now, but that message is still valid. Reading this very simple and poignant letter can give you, the reader, an idea of what needs to be done and why we must care for the Palestinian, the Lebanese, the Jew, the Arab, the Afghan, the African and many more displaced fellow humans in all parts of the world.

Once in a lifetime comes a cause that is worth being involved in. Many of us pass through this earth never having had the opportunity to do something meaningful. In that respect, getting to know and understand the role and functions of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War Inc, is such an opportunity. Until very recently the Foundation remained relatively unknown. However when it carried out its first Tribunal hearing in late November 2011, many realised the invaluable work it had undertaken. But the sitting of the Tribunal and its verdict had only a muted response in the local press. If the verdict could not awaken the people from their slumber, what effect would it have on an international community? Scorn and ridicule



were hurled at the KL War Crimes Tribunal. Undaunted, in May 2012, a second charge was heard against several former international leaders. The guilty verdict, although not enforceable, will nevertheless serve to remind an uncaring international audience, that we in Malaysia stand for justice. War is a crime and we have to expose war crimes no matter where it takes place. Who suffers the most when the major powers decide to go to war, to enforce regime change or hold the notion that Islamists have threatened their way of life? Without solid evidence, the United States and Britain and their Western Allies have invaded Iraq, taking retro-action when no weapons of mass destruction were found. Then it became “regime-change” to justify their criminal acts. Who suffered? The people of Iraq – we heard evidence of the types of torture and cruelty the invaders and their cronies inflicted on innocent civilians when the KL Tribunal held its second session last May. The trauma, the untold suffering, the wrecked lives of millions of people, have remained distant memories. Until the KLFCW unearthed it and took decisive action. Today, both George W. Bush and Anthony L.Blair have been declared criminals for committing crimes against humanity. But that itself means nothing unless further measures are taken to right the many wrongs committed. We cannot and do not have the clout to “punish” these people. But we have the power within ourselves to have war criminalised – so that any one who wages war is condemned the world over as a criminal. This then is the aim of this publication – to provide the young and not-so-young the real opportunity to make a difference in this world. To become involved in the ideals and workings of the KLFCW so that the message is carried to every home, every town, every kampong in our peace-loving nation. The young feel the pains of war and suffering the most. The young are the ones


who care, they have passion in them for the simple things in life. They feel pain, joy, hurt and comfort very easily. Their compassion and sense of goodness is unadulterated, it is pure, it comes from the heart. With this publication, we are reaching out to young Malaysians, requesting them to pause and to ponder the merits and demerits of war. Would you choose destruction over construction? Would you prefer bombardment over freedom to run and play as you will? Will you wage war knowing that lives will be lost? Will you kill? This then is the opportunity to form a solid base foundation of brotherhood to reject war. We need to have this legislated. We need to have elected representatives who denounce war. We need to spread this movement across the seas and oceans and land masses and link with like-minded groups in many parts of the world. This is a revolution - but a revolution that has peaceful aims and the betterment of society. We need to dump the arms and weapons that kill, maim or cause injury to limbs. But we also need to know what war is all about. We need to keep our history in perspective. We cannot wipe aside history, rather we need to study it, seek its roots and never make the same mistakes. We need to have a “new order” in the world. To us, Malaysia is the starting point of this journey fraught with pitfalls, obstacles, ridicule and even disdain. But if we accept that war is a crime, if we truly and honestly believe that the world can live in peace, join us at the KLFCW to make the difference. Let our children live in a world that embraces each other, with no colour, creed or religious and ethnic barriers. Let our children band together and form a movement that is truly universal working for one aim – no more wars! THE EDITOR

Reaching Out To The Young

The mission of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War would only see limited success if its message is not carried down to the masses. In this case, the masses mean the young citizens of the country. All secondary schoolchildren must be reached through the publication, activity programmes, talks, seminars and several other avenues. At the moment, the KLFCW has served to criminalise war by conducting hearings, gathering information, investigating and by holding public Tribunals. Two such sittings have found several former leaders of the United States and Britain guilty of crimes against humanity. Earlier articles of these sittings and findings are found in this publication.

The Plan This publication, Criminalise War, will lead the way by having issues distributed to boarding schools initially. School children will then have the opportunity to understand the reasons why this Foundation was established. It will be necessary to rid the notion that the trials have been “sham” or that they have no legal standing. The Tribunal only does not have the power to enforce the verdict. These and other aspects will be explained to the young citizens. They will then be given background briefings/information on such issues as the Iraq invasion, the bombings of Afghanistan and several other violations of human beings and way of life. “War is about killing” – that is the message of the founder of the KLFCW. Children must understand this terrible fact. In war, thousands and even millions of fellow human beings have lost their lives. Children have lost fathers and mothers and brothers and sisters. This must never again happen any where in the world. The Plan calls for the setting up of “Criminalise War Clubs” to be run entirely by school children. There will be a universal charter that all such clubs in the country will abide by. Elected leaders from individual schools will with the advice and guidance of KLFCW run their own regular meetings and programmes. Members will have the opportunity to listen to “experts” who will provide the background to current issues. History is an important aspect in the annals of any country. History must not be distorted. Rather, the young members of the clubs will be taught history, events like World War I and World War II, the Korean War, The Indo-China War and other recent wars of the 20th century will be explained. This then gives the members a better understanding of the nature of war. They must realize that in war, there are no victors, only victims. NOVEMBER 2012 CRIMINALISE WAR


A Variety of activities Other programmes will follow in due course. But the initial step will be to get the schools of accept the concept and for the Ministry of Education to sanction it. Towards that end, efforts will be made by this publication to obtain the permission and endorsement of the relevant authorities. Schools already have clubs and societies, some are uniformed while others are not. This Club will be a non-uniformed movement that embraces all students. Suggested activities would include: Essay Writing Contests Public Speaking (on topics related to war) Understanding the criminal nature of war

These young students and members of the clubs will be challenged to work toward a goal of helping to create a nation that renounces war. If it took one brave British parliamentarian the course to help pass a bill that made “trading in slavery illegal” a long time ago, then perhaps now is the time for Malaysians to consider initiating a move that will see war abolished in the long run. It will take a long and hard battle to gain the ultimate aim – that Malaysia has a constitution that rejects war!!! While these may appear difficult tasks at the moment, unless we move toward that direction, nothing will be achieved. Like-minded citizens and readers of this publication are encouraged to submit written suggestions, ideas and plans on some of the topics that have been mentioned here. We need to gather a groundswell of interest and action to get started. Then Malaysians can truly say that they have taken the first, bold step towards criminalising war. For the Clubs to succeed, there must be full cooperation between the schools and KLFCW. Eventually, these clubs will work toward a national-level grouping. It then becomes possible for links to be established with like-minded clubs, young peoples’ movements that have the same aim – ridding the world of war. It is envisaged that these initial suggestions will be refined and honed to suit the needs of individual schools and clubs. However, they must all adhere to the Charter that the KLFCW will draw up. Eventually, school children themselves will determine the course of action, draw up their own initiatives and lead this fledgling movement to greater heights. This is the start, and we cannot delay any longer.





Palestinian Ghasan Matar, 14, who lost his legs in an explosion during the Israeli war on Gaza, sits on a bed at his family’s house in Gaza City

gaza’s children struggle with memories of war

July 10, 2009 • By Patrick Moser

Fourteen-year-old Ghasan Matar won’t talk about the explosion that cost him his legs and killed his brother. In fact, six months after the end of the 22-day operation ended on January 18, 2009,Israeli war on Gaza, he still barely talks at all.

More than 300 children were among the 1,400 Palestinians killed and many more were wounded during the 22-day Israeli offensive that ended on January 18, according to Palestinian figures.

He spends most of his time staring at the walls and a huge poster depicting his older brother against a bloody background of war featuring a Kalashnikov assault rifle and dead Israeli soldiers.

Seven-year-old Ahmed Salah al-Samuni smiles timidly as he is tossed a green plastic ball but quickly loses interest, instead digging his nails into a couch in a brightly coloured room used for psycho-social counselling sessions.

Palestinian Ghasan Matar, 14, who lost his legs in an explosion during the Israeli war on Gaza, sits on a bed at his family’s house in Gaza City

“I remember that Israelis came and ordered us out. Shells were fired,” he says when asked what he remembers of the war.

He says he never thinks about the day when the house was hit during heavy shelling of Gaza City’s Zeitun neighbourhood. He insists he has no nightmares. “I’m doing fine,” he says, and then clams up.

“Grandmother and grandfather are dead,” he says, going on to list about 10 others who died when his house was bombed. In all, 29 were killed in the attack, 18 of them from his direct family.



“I love Azza and want her back,” he says of his twoand-a-half year-old sister who was among the dead.

“But it’s a long process. He has seen so many dead bodies,” says counsellor Sabri Abu Nadi.

After the attack, he lay in a pool of blood. It’s only when he cried out for his mother that she realised he was still alive.

A huge number of children went through “horrible situations” during the war, says Saji Elmughanni, the Gaza spokesman for the UN children’s agency UNICEF. “Nowhere was safe” in the overcrowded sliver of land wedged between Israel, the Mediterranean and Egypt.

A large scar runs across his face, another along his hip. His nose is still deformed from the shrapnel wounds. “He’d scream out at night: ‘The Jews are coming to kill me’,” his father says. His psychological scars are also starting to heal.

And experts say a vast majority of the children who make up more than half of Gaza’s 1.5 million population, will bear the psychological scars for years to come. Many bury their feelings deep inside. Source:



my life in wartime iraq 30 March, 2003 • Today was a really sad day. The Doura district in south Baghdad came under attack from cluster bombs. We’ve got quite a few friends who live there, as well as one of my other cousins and his family. We were all so worried about them, but we couldn’t phone or go to see them.… On TV they’ve been showing children who’ve been taken to hospital with terrible burns. I had tears pouring down my face as I watched, wondering if such terrible things could happen to me, or any of the people I love.… There are men and children dying, and women crying for them. What kind of hatred must they be feeling for the invaders whose leaders say they’ve sent in their armies to liberate us? And what kind of hatred for the Iraqi leadership as well? 2 April, 2003 • In the middle of the night we were thrown out of our beds by such massive explosions. With the whole city in pitch darkness, no one knew what was happening. The explosions were coming from somewhere nearby.… Some of the missiles flew over our house and we could see the huge flashes light up the sky when each one hit, followed by the deafening sound of the explosions and a great gust of wind. We also heard glass shatter nearby.… We all got up except for Sama, who was too scared and asked me to stay next to her. Just as Mum was hurrying to open all the doors of the house, another explosion


went off, making the house shake and the lights jiggle about; I had the feeling the roof was about to fall in on us. We were all rooted to the spot, looking at each other wondering what was going to happen next when the third missile fell.… Everyone is just drained and worried, and we don’t know what to do. Sometimes we forget where the candles are or have to search for a match just to have a light. And then when we find each other again, we sit down together, just waiting and waiting and waiting. Overhead it’s raining, not water but missiles, and we wonder when the rain will stop.

children’s lives were not spared in sabra and shatilla massacres By Zuhra Rafikova

There are no adjectives to describe the indiscriminate killings which took place on September 16, 1982. According to the Red Crescent Society, up to 2,000 men, women and children were atrociously killed by the Phalangists. The Kahan Commission reported that the Israeli Defence Forces occupying Beirut and the Minister of Defence were responsible for the massacres that took place in these camps. The most blatant and repulsive of all was the mass slaughter of the innocent refugees, including women and children that were largely ignored by the mainstream media, especially in European countries. An American journalist, Janet Stevens, who was among the first to visit both camps wrote in her testimony: ‌I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after

being lined up against the wall; children with their throats slit, a pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide open, her blackened face silently screaming in horrors; countless babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had been thrown into garbage piles. The Sabra and Shatilla massacres were some of the most unforgivable crimes against humanity which took place in the 20th century despite the many democratic values and human rights declarations overwhelmingly advocated by the leaders of that part of the hemisphere. However, until now, none of the perpetrators of the massacres have been tried or charged for their sordid crimes. A researcher, Linda A. Malone questions whether there was any justice for Palestinian, Lebanese and other victims of the massacres. Can the world community justly condemn and punish the perpetrators of the massacres? Could



international law or any other international jurisdiction impose responsibility on the criminals? Theoretically the answer should be, “Yes.” But for all practical purposes the answer seems more negative than anything else.

The world should not forget such grievous periods that overshadowed the history of humanity and stay indifferent towards such atrocities. No criminal should be allowed to avoid justice. Such war crimes should not be forgotten so that generations to come will never repeat these heinous deeds, and learn from them.



a child’s life in wartime sarajevo. APRIL 20, 1992 DEAR MIMMY, War is no joke, it seems. It destroys, kills, burns, separates, brings unhappiness. Terrible shells fell today on Bascarsija, the old town center. Terrible explosions. We went down into the cellar, the cold, dark, revolting cellar. And ours isn’t even all that safe. Mommy, Daddy, and I just stood there, holding on to each other in a corner that looked safe. Standing there in the dark, in the warmth of my parents’ arms, I thought about leaving Sarajevo. Everybody is thinking about it, and so am I. I couldn’t bear to go alone, to leave behind Mommy and Daddy, Grandma and Granddad. And going with just Mommy isn’t any good either. The best would be for all three of us to go. But Daddy can’t? So I’ve decided we should stay here together. Tomorrow I’ll tell Keka that you have to be brave and stay with those you love and those who love you.


MAY 5, 1992 DEAR MIMMY, The shooting seems to be dying down. I guess they’ve caused enough misery, although I don’t know why. It has something to do with politics. I just hope the “kids” come to some agreement. Oh, if only they would, so we could live and breathe as human beings again... I want it to stop for ever. PEACE! PEACE!


On June 8, 1972, South Vietnamese planes dropped a napalm bomb on Trang Bang, which had been attacked and occupied by North Vietnamese forces. The Vietnamese-born peace activist Kim Phuc Phan Thi is the living symbol of the suffering of innocent war victims. Her image of being burned by napalm during the Vietnam War raised worldwide awareness of the horrors of the War and made her the bearer of the message of forgiveness, reconciliation and tolerance.

The girl depicted in the picture is Kim Phuc on June 8, 1972: Kim Phuc, center running down a road nude near Trang Bang after a South Vietnamese Air Force napalm attack.

In a commemorative ceremony for the Vietnam War, in Washington, as she was delivering a speech, she publicly pardoned the person who had launched the napalm bombing of her village in Vietnam. Kim Phuc Phan Thi was designated UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador in 1994. Ever since, she has dedicated her life to promoting peace, and to this end she founded the Kim Foundation International. This foundation helps children who are victims of war by providing medical and psychological support in order that they overcome their traumatic experiences. Kim Phuc said in London: “I see the picture and the documentary (referring to a film that was made about her life in 1997). That makes me remember all the time. I saw the airplane. I saw the fire. I got burned. I was so scared and crying and running out of the fire.” Kim Phuc added later:

“Panicking under the fire I suddenly realised that my feet had not been burned. At least I could run away. If my feet wound have been burned I would have died in the fire.” Kim Phuc does not try to avoid memories. She wants to see the photograph exposed to future generations. “Let the world see how horrible wars can be”, Tom Buerkle of the IHT quotes her.




anne frank’s diary

The timeline of Anne’s diary refers to the period from June 12, 1942 to August 1, 1944. After May 1940 the good times were few and far between: first there was the war, then the capitulation and then the arrival of the Germans, which is when the trouble started for the Jews. Our freedom was severely restricted by a series of anti-Jewish decrees: Jews were required to wear a yellow star; Jews were required to turn in their bicycles; Jews were forbidden to use street-cars; Jews were forbidden to ride in cars, even their own; Jews were required to do their shopping between 3 and 5 P.M.; Jews were required to frequent only Jewish-owned barbershops and beauty parlors; Jews were forbidden to be out on the streets between 8 P.M. and 6 A.M.; Jews were forbidden to attend theaters, movies or any other forms of entertainment; Jews were forbidden to use swimming pools, tennis


courts, hockey fields or any other athletic fields; Jews were forbidden to go rowing; Jews were forbidden to take part in any athletic activity in public; Jews were forbidden to sit in their gardens or those of their friends after 8 P.M.; Jews were forbidden to visit Christians in their homes; Jews were required to attend Jewish schools, etc. You couldn’t do this and you couldn’t do that, but life went on. Jacque always said to me, “I don’t dare do anything anymore, ‘cause I’m afraid it’s not allowed.”

Children Of Gaza Reliving The Horrors Of War In Their Artwork

Children should be painting pictures of life‌. not war and death, but the children of Gaza are still reliving the horrors of the Israeli blitzkrieg. These children are talented, but their memories and nightmares have taken over their creativity.

The pictures retrieved from:



Images taken by Ayman Quader


Children Of Gaza Reliving The Horrors Of War In Their Artwork




Children Of Gaza Reliving The Horrors Of War In Their Artwork



Children Of Gaza Reliving The Horrors Of War In Their Artwork

*Note: A Bay Area children’s museum shut down a planned exhibition of Gaza children’s drawings


KLFCW CONFERENCE ON WAR-AFFECTED CHILDREN On the morning of 22 November 2012, the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW) organised the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WAR-AFFECTED CHILDREN, where invited speakers from within Malaysia and abroad spoke strongly on various critical issues in regard to the impact of war on children. Under the theme of “Criminalising War and Protecting Children”, the Chairman and Founder of KLFCW, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, delivered a Keynote Address where he emphasised the criminality and futility of war as a means of resolving conflicts. He stressed that today’s children, being the leaders in their own countries in the future, must be made to understand this and be urged to join in and participate actively in the international community’s efforts in criminalizing war and energising peace. The other speakers at the Conference spoke on a wide range of topics as shown below – • Prof Francis A. Boyle, professor of International Law at the University of Illinois, USA on “Legal Protection of Children in Armed Conflict” • Ms. Chea Leang, Co-Prosecutor of the ECCC/ Prosecutor General of the Supreme Court of Cambodia on “Khmer Rouge: Atrocities Committed on Children • Professor Paola Manduca, Geneticist, University of Genoa, on “What War Does To Children” • Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah binti Mohd. Ali, Trustee of KLFCW, on “Children’s Charter to Criminalise War” The Conference highlighted the fact that children have consistently become victims of war and armed conflict, that 90 per cent of war’s victims are civilians, mainly children and women, that almost one half of the world’s 21 million refugees are children, that some 300,000 children under eighteen had been forcibly recruited as soldiers, more than 2 million children had been killed, 6 million had been injured, over 10 million had been traumatised and more than 1 million orphaned in the 10 year period between 1986 and 1996 alone, that the number has increased over the years since then, and that some 10,000 children had become victims of landmines each year. The participants at the Conference were also reminded that war violates every right of a child – the right to life, the right to be with family and community, the right to health, the right to the development of the personality and the right to be nurtured and protected. With the realisation that unless wars are criminalised, more children will continue to become victims in the future, the participants at the Conference unanimously resolved that a “Children’s Charter to Criminalise War” should be passed. The Board of Trustees of KLFCW, guided by what had transpired at the Conference, immediately established a Drafting Committee to work on a preliminary draft. The Drafting Committee had since submitted its proposal and the document was finally approved by the Board of Trustees of KLFCW. This draft Charter will be finally launched for signature by the Children of the World on the evening of 22nd November 2012 by the Chairman and Founder of KLFCW, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at the Putra World Trade Centre, Kuala Lumpur. The Children’s Charter to Criminalise War reads as follows –



Children s Charter to Criminalise War We, the Children of the World, Realising that war and armed conflict have constantly been used by states and governments as instruments of foreign policy; Acknowledging that wars have never been the best and just solutions to end conflicts and disputes; Recognising that children have consistently become victims of war and armed conflict; Recalling that 90 per cent of war’s victims are civilians, mainly children and women; Recalling that almost one half of the world’s 21 million refugees are children; Recalling that approximately 300,000 children under 18 years old have been forced or induced to take up arms as child soldiers; Recalling that between 1986 and 1996, armed conflicts killed 2 million children, injured 6 million, traumatized over 10 million and left more than 1 million orphaned; Realising that each year, between 8,000 and 10,000 children are victims of landmines; Fully conscious that war violates every right of a child – the right to life, the right to be with family and community, the right to health, the right to the development of the personality and the right to be nurtured and protected; Concerned that unless wars are criminalized more children will become victims in the future;


Mindful that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 has recognized that children deserve to be protected against harm under international law; Recalling further that the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Foundation (KLFCW) is waging a noble effort to criminalise war and energise peace: DO HEREBY RESOLVE AND DEMAND that – Wars of aggression must be made a crime and all their perpetrators be brought to justice; States and governments must always protect children from becoming victims of wars and armed conflicts; Children must never be forced or induced to participate in any wars or armed conflicts; Children who are refugees in foreign countries or displaced within their own countries must be given special care, aid and attention by the international community; Children in war zones, areas of conflict or disasters must be rescued and given care and protection until peace and public order has been restored. DONE at the city of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia this twenty second day of November 2012
























In the presence of









ESSAY WRITING COMPETITION All secondary and primary school children are invited to submit an essay, in their own hand-writing, of between 450-500 words on the topic:

“ Why Wars Should Never Take Place” Students are encouraged to give their own views, expressed in English, stating why they are against wars. This competition is open to all primary and secondary students in the country. They must be original . While students are encouraged to conduct their own research, the final submission must not be “downloaded” from any search sites. The essays must clearly show that each participant fully understands the subject and feels from the heart the cruelty of war and destruction. To ensure fairness, students will be classified by age groups: 10-12; 13-15; 16 and above. Each category will have winners or essays that are selected for special mention. Prizes and commendations will be given to selected winners. For the primary level, the same topic will apply and the same rules will be used in judging entries. Prizes will include book vouchers and comendations. **************** Those who are creative will want to consider joining the “Drawing Competition” whereby the theme will again be “anti-war” but participants will be allowed to use their imagination on subject matter and their choice of materials used: water colour, crayons, or even oil. Prizes for this section will also be vouchers and commendations. This competition is open to both primary and seconadry students. **************** Particpants for the above competitions must provide the following information: • • • •

NAME NAME OF SCHOOL STANDARD/FORM AGE All entries must be submitted before the 31th of December 2012 to

THE SECRETARY GENERAL KUALA LUMPUR FOUNDATION TO CRIMINALISE WAR 2nd Floor, 88 Jalan Perdana, Taman Tasek Perdana, 50480 Kuala Lumpur Selected winners will be notified via their schools.


Criminalise War Magazine  

KLFCW Criminalise War Magazine Edition 1

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you